Archive for the ‘Debt – Deficit’ Category

87% agree: “A debt problem is a failure of leadership” … but, there’s a surprise twist

April 7, 2011

Yesterday, Freedomworks (a conservative org) released the results of a survey on the debt and deficit.

Folks were asked: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.

It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies…

Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally.

Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’

Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” 

A resounding 87% of the respondents agreed with the statement.

The percentage dropped to the high 50s when the statement was identified with its speaker: Sen. Barack Obama, Congressional Record, S.2237-8, 3/16/06

Which party created the gov’t bureaucracies ?

January 27, 2011

Everybody knows that Fed Dept’s have many overlapping and redundant agencies … and that inefficiency rules the day.

My POV: getting Fed spending under control can’t be done simply “at the margin” by squeezing all agencies 10% or so. 

Rather, major surgery needs to be done – eliminating agencies or whole departments.

I assumed that most of the bureaucracies were set up by Dems, and was surprised to learn that out of the 15 Departments in the Executive Branch … 

  • The Founding Fathers created 3
  • Democrats created 5
  • Republicans created 7

Republicans created these Departments;

image

Hmmm.

This ad says it all …

October 25, 2010

Watch it first, then read the background below …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSQozWP-rM&feature=player_embedded

Background

“Last week, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) unveiled a national ad addressing our country’s spending addiction, the dangers of relentless deficits, and the corrosive nature of our national debt.

The ad features a chilling look at one potential future scenario if America continues on its current destructive fiscal trajectory.

The new ad is part of an ongoing communications program in CAGW’s decades-long fight against wasteful government spending, increased taxes, out-of-control deficit spending, and a crippling national debt that threatens the future and survival of our country.

CAGW plans to run the ad on major cable networks throughout the rest of 2010 and into 2011.”

http://www.cagw.org/

 

“We’re too broke to be this stupid”

June 2, 2010

Punch line: Beleaguered taxpayers may finally put a stop to the sheer waste of government spending …  Why?  There’s no choice !

* * * * *

Excerpted from Macleans:: We’re too broke to be this stupid, Mark Steyn, May 27, 2010

Back in 2008, a reader wrote to advise me to lighten up, on the grounds that “we’re rich enough to afford to be stupid.”

Two years later, we’re a lot less rich. In fact, many Western nations are, in any objective sense, insolvent. 

It no longer matters whether you’re intellectually in favour of European-style social democracy: simply as a practical matter, it’s unaffordable.

In any advanced society, there will be a certain number of dysfunctional citizens either unable or unwilling to do what is necessary to support themselves and their dependents.

What to do about such people? Ignore the problem? Attempt to fix it?

The former nags at the liberal guilt complex, while the latter is way too much like hard work.

So the easiest “solution” to the problem is to throw public money at it.

Since the Second World War, the hard-working middle classes have transferred historically unprecedented amounts of money to the unproductive sector in order not to have to think about it. We were rich enough that we could afford to be stupid.

To be “poor” in the 21st-century West is not to be hungry and emaciated but to be obese.  When Michelle Obama turned up to serve food at a soup kitchen, its poverty-stricken clientele snapped pictures of her with their cellphones.

In one-sixth of British households, not a single family member works. They are not so much without employment as without need of it.

At a certain level, your hard-working bourgeois understands that the bulk of his contribution to the treasury is entirely wasted. It’s one of the basic rules of life: if you reward bad behaviour, you get more of it.

According to a Fox News poll earlier this year, 65 per cent of Americans understand that the government gets its money from taxpayers, but 24 per cent think the government has “plenty of its own money without using taxpayer dollars.”

There is almost nothing the state won’t pay for. A much-mocked mayor in Doncaster, England, announced a year or two back that he wanted to stop funding for the Gay Pride parade on the grounds that, if they’re so damn proud of it, why can’t they pay for it? He was soon forced to back down.

“Green jobs” is just another of those rich-enough-to-be-stupid scams. The Spanish government pays over $800,000 for every “green job” on a solar-panel assembly line. This money is taken from real workers with real jobs at real businesses whose growth is being squashed.

The social compact of the postwar era cannot hold. Across the developed world, a beleaguered middle class is beginning to understand that it’s no longer that rich. At some point, it will look at the sheer waste of government spending, the other shoe will drop, and it will decide that it no longer wishes to be that stupid.

Full article:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/05/27/were-too-broke-to-be-this-stupid/

What does $1 trillion (plus or minus) get you these days ?

June 1, 2010

Answer: If perception is reality, then not much.

Stimulus spending has far exceeded $1 trillion (don’t forget Fed actions and bailouts).

Since the 3 to 4 million jobs saved or created was discarded as a metric, we’ve got look elsewhere for performance measurements.

How about how people assess the effect of Obama’s economic programs on them personally ?

Left-leaning CBS conducted a poll and found that:

  • More people think Obama’s economic programs have hurt (18%), rather than helping them (13%)
  • Less than 1 in 4 Dems think Obama’s economic programs have helped them
  • The vast majority — 68% – think Obama’s economic programs have had no effect on them

So, taking the most favorable view, people think that a trillion dollars in added debt has bought us, well, nothing.

Oops.

image
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_052510.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Milestone: US National Debt ticks past $13 Trillion on the debt clock …

May 28, 2010

According to the US Nation Debt Clock, a milestone was achieved this week:

The US National Debt is now officially more than $13 Trillion.

* * * * *

To put the Debt number in perspective:

(1) It’s already equal to over 90% of annual GDP

(2) It’s heading higher by almost $1.5 Trillion annually at current tax and spending rates

(3) If you’re in the half of the population that pays income taxes, your share of the US Debt is almost $120,000

image 

image 

image

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

IMF says: “US has more to do than any other country … to bring its debt back towards sustainable levels”

May 20, 2010

The UK Telegraph says: “The  US faces one of biggest budget crunches in world”

The crux of the Telegraph’s argument:

1) Under the Obama administration’s current fiscal plans, the national debt in the US will climb to above 100% of GDP by 2015 – a far steeper increase than almost any other country.

image

image

 

2) The US has a higher debt (relative to GDP) and a far shorter maturity of government debt than most other countries.  Said differently, the US must rollover its increasing debt more frequently – and is, therefore, vulnerable to increasing rates and variations in demand (e.g. what if China stops buying US debt ?).

image image

3) Bottom line (according to the IMF’s projections),  the US has more to do than any other country in the developed world (apart from Japan) when it comes to bringing its debt back towards sustainable levels.

* * * * *

Full article:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100005702/us-faces-one-of-biggest-budget-crunches-in-western-world-imf/

Full IMF Report:
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fm/2010/fm1001.pdf

image

* * * * *

Your green neighbor wants an electric car … get out your wallet!

May 14, 2010

This week I was again struck by the irony: the US Feds – who have no money and are deeply in debt — are going to borrow still more money from China to bail out the Greeks – who are deeply in debt.  That’s nuts.

And, the few remaining US taxpayers are going to asked (make that ‘told’) that they (and the Chinese lenders) subsidize their neighbors new green rides. 

And incumbents wonder why voters are dispatching them one after another …

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ: Welfare Wagons The new electric cars are powered by taxpayer credits, May 12, 2010

Congratulations. You’re about to buy a fancy new Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt . . . for someone else.

The all electric  Nissan Leaf is a car for a wealthy hobbyist — good for a trip of 100 miles after which it becomes an inert lump at the end of your driveway (or behind a tow truck) for the many hours it will take to recharge. 

The Leaf will roll out in December with a surprisingly modest price of $25,280. That’s after a $7,500 federal tax credit is counted.

Buyers will also have to spring for a $2,200 charging station, but another tax credit ($1,100) cuts the cost in half.

Some states – e.g. bankrupt California, Georgia and Tennessee — will chip in additional consumer tax credits as high as $5,000.

  • Note: total tax credits = $13,600

By pricing low and going for volume, Nissan is making a calculated grab for the lion’s share of the available tax dollars — and also pressuring Washington to extend the program when the money runs out.

iPad lust applies to cars too, and early adopters can be expected to line up around the block.

But it is insane to subsidize these vehicles with taxpayer dollars.

Tax handouts for electric vehicles are emblematic of an alarmingly childish refusal to take account that the U.S. government is deeply in debt. Running up more debt to subsidize electric runabouts for suburbanites is not such a sign.

* * * * *

Even if you believe saving gasoline is a holy cause, subsidizing electric cars simply is not a substitute for politicians finding the courage to jack up gas prices.

Think about it this way:

  • You can double the fuel efficiency of any car by putting a second person in it.
  • You can increase its fuel efficiency to infinity by refraining from frivolous trips.

These are the incentives that flow from a higher gas price.

Exactly the opposite incentives flow from mandatory investment in higher-mileage vehicles. If you paid a lot for a car that costs very little to operate, why not operate it? Why bother to car pool? Why not drive across town for a jar of mayonnaise?

* * * * *

Full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703880304575236692175987752.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h