Shopsmith Forums

But this problem has been going on much longer than the last 4 years. When the Republicans were in power, they didn't do anything to fix it and didn't really care to try. They ran up record deficits and instituted major spending increases. (That's even ignoring the wars.) Sure, Obama makes Bush look miserly, but that doesn't change that Bush was a big government, big spending politician as well.

They all give lip service to it, but that's about it. The problem serves them by giving them rhetorical leverage against the other party. That goes for both parties.

I, like almost everyone my generation, are fiscal conservatives and social liberals. We believe in taking care of your citizens in the most fiscally responsible way possible. Government should provide military, education, infrastructure, police, fire, necessary regulation, a hand-up (not hand-out), and HEALTHCARE for every citizen. Other than that, they need to get the hell out of our lives.

I am no fan of Obama but let's look at our actual numbers. I only deal in facts, so I'll use CBO's numbers. Last year of Bush, our deficit was 1.43 Trillion per year. It is now estimated at 900 billion. That's a 30% reduction in deficit spending. To go one step farther if Bush somehow was elected to a 3rd term (I know it's impossible, but humor me) and kept spending just like he had... We would be sitting at 18-19 trillion total debt vs our current 16 trillion. BOTH parties are to blame. They both spend our money like its free. The main difference is what they spend it on... War and tax-cuts vs infrastructure and pork.

Congressmen are heavily invested in "defense" companies. Every time we spend money on defense, they get richer.

The dinosaurs in office now (left and right) are killing our country with this partisan crap. Keep in mind that BOTH parties actively work to steal our tax money to make themselves richer and to divide us. It is both parties that have stolen several trillion for social security, then because they can't pay it back they talk about "cutting entitlements". I have paid around 60k in social security so far and I won't see a dime when I retire.

joshh wrote:I have paid around 60k in social security so far and I won't see a dime when I retire.

And I for one want to thank you for making my retirement possible. I have contributed to previous retirees' SS retirement checks for 55 years and now it's time for others to fund my retirement.

joshh wrote: Government should provide military, education, infrastructure, police, fire, necessary regulation, a hand-up (not hand-out), and HEALTHCARE for every citizen. Other than that, they need to get the hell out of our lives. .

Josh, as I read the US Constitution only one of the above (military or defense) is the role of the federal government. Everything else you list should be provided by the state and local level (should the people of that community chose to do so). That in itself is the root of our fiscal problem.

And by the way, once you invite the government into your education, healthcare, protection and individual assistance (hand-up) you have lost any ability to then demand it stay "the hell out of our lives".

You are quite welcome I can't wait for retirement...in thirty more years

joshh wrote:You are quite welcome I can't wait for retirement...in thirty more years

If you have 30 years to go before you can retire, you had better be investing in your own retirement plan. The others won't be there for you when the time comes.

The takers will have already disposed of it.

major_bob wrote:Josh, as I read the US Constitution only one of the above (military or defense) is the role of the federal government. Everything else you list should be provided by the state and local level (should the people of that community chose to do so). That in itself is the root of our fiscal problem.

And by the way, once you invite the government into your education, healthcare, protection and individual assistance (hand-up) you have lost any ability to then demand it stay "the hell out of our lives".

Fair enough points. It has been my experience that states (for whatever reason) are ineffective at protecting their citizens. Perfect example is medical radiation. The federal government left it up to each state to decide the education requirements for radiographers. So, as a result, we have 5 states that allow "limited scope X-ray technicians" (a technologist like myself has a minimum of 3 years of college plus 1.5 years of clinical training, more than an RN has). This lack of federal regulation is terrifying since someone who has a few weeks of training could be exposing you to 1000 times the radiation needed for an exam. Only the federal government has the scope and ability to protect all US citizens. Education is left to each state (for the most part), and as a result students are under-educated in some states vs others.

There has to be a balance to be effective. There are things, like those I listed, that only the federal government can fix. Government is the problem and the solution (if it chooses to be).

joshh wrote:I, like almost everyone my generation, are fiscal conservatives and social liberals. We believe in taking care of your citizens in the most fiscally responsible way possible. Government should provide military, education, infrastructure, police, fire, necessary regulation, a hand-up (not hand-out), and HEALTHCARE for every citizen. Other than that, they need to get the hell out of our lives.

I am no fan of Obama but let's look at our actual numbers. I only deal in facts, so I'll use CBO's numbers. Last year of Bush, our deficit was 1.43 Trillion per year. It is now estimated at 900 billion. That's a 30% reduction in deficit spending. To go one step farther if Bush somehow was elected to a 3rd term (I know it's impossible, but humor me) and kept spending just like he had... We would be sitting at 18-19 trillion total debt vs our current 16 trillion. BOTH parties are to blame. They both spend our money like its free. The main difference is what they spend it on... War and tax-cuts vs infrastructure and pork.

Congressmen are heavily invested in "defense" companies. Every time we spend money on defense, they get richer.

The dinosaurs in office now (left and right) are killing our country with this partisan crap. Keep in mind that BOTH parties actively work to steal our tax money to make themselves richer and to divide us. It is both parties that have stolen several trillion for social security, then because they can't pay it back they talk about "cutting entitlements". I have paid around 60k in social security so far and I won't see a dime when I retire.

If you only deal in facts you know Congress and not the president approves the budget. Under Bush for the last 4 years or so we had Democratic controlled congress as we do now with democratic Senate, the exception of the last 2 years Republicans controls the house. Who is calling for spending cuts? Who is wanting to spend more? People cite Clinton for balanced budget but who controlled the Senate? Who shoot down his spending plans? Who demands the SS surplus be spent?
Come on the president is little more than the person to blame the congress is where spending and cutting is made. Remember Reagan he has a democratic congress and a republician congress, when his greatest strides were made is when he had a Republican Senate.

Joshh, I think you need to rethink your facts.

As I recall, Obama was president in fiscal year 2009, at least from late January until September 30th so I don't know how you calculate that the deficit belongs to Bush, except that liberals blame everything on Bush specifically and Republicans in general. I also recall that Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus bill in early 2009. And, we don't know what the deficit for fiscal year 2013 will be since we still have almost nine months to go. Moreover, the deficit for the last year Bush was entirely responsible for was that of FY 2008 and that deficit was $459 billion. The deficit under Obama for FY 2012 was $1.089 trillion, which was down from $1.3 trillion in 2011, which was about the same as Obama's deficit of $1.293 trillion in 2010. And, if you want to speculate on deficits for the next four years, odds makers have it at another trillion dollars for each one of those years.

In addition, the national debt was $10.6 trillion when Obama took office. Today it is $16.4 trillion.

pennview wrote:Joshh, I think you need to rethink your facts.

As I recall, Obama was president in fiscal year 2009, at least from late January until September 30th so I don't know how you calculate that the deficit belongs to Bush, except that liberals blame everything on Bush specifically and Republicans in general. I also recall that Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus bill in early 2009. And, we don't know what the deficit for fiscal year 2013 will be since we still have almost nine months to go. Moreover, the deficit for the last year Bush was entirely responsible for was that of FY 2008 and that deficit was $459 billion. The deficit under Obama for FY 2012 was $1.089 trillion, which was down from $1.3 trillion in 2011, which was about the same as Obama's deficit of $1.293 trillion in 2010. And, if you want to speculate on deficits for the next four years, odds makers have it at another trillion dollars for each one of those years.

In addition, the national debt was $10.6 trillion when Obama took office. Today it is $16.4 trillion.

According to the CBO fiscal years trail actual years by 1. Bush's budgets were 2002 - 2009 and Obama's are 2010 - 2017. You are correct that our national debt was 10.6 trillion when Obama took office. If we continued spending at the same spending as Bush's last budget year we would have the following national debt:

Jan 31, 2010: 12.03 Trillion
Jan 31, 2011: 13.46 Trillion
Jan 31, 2011: 14.89 Trillion
Jan 31, 2012: 16.32 Trillion
Jan 31, 2013: 17.75 Trillion
This is compared to 16.4 Trillion that we actually have right now. His deficit has never reached Bush's high of 1.43 Trillion.

I do know that the president doesn't control spending. Instead of a comprehensive budget, we have all these stopgap bills and "cliff" talks. This way each side can kick the can a few months. Then each year house submits rediculous budgets they know won't pass and don't actually want to pass. They know the senate won't ever vote for them, but it allows them to say, "no budget in 4 years". In addition, the house took Obama's budget proposal and butchered it then said, "his budget got zero votes" but neglect to say it wasn't really his budget...he cant legally submit a budget (only the house can do that). it is a mock-up, scam, whatever you want to call it. I don't think anyone honestly believes if it was really his budget, that he couldn't get a single democrat to go along with it.

Please don't confuse my intentions, I didn't vote for Obama and disagree with a lot that he has done. I simply want people to realize the debt would be the roughly the same with or without him and the insane debt we have is a result of both parties. When voters each blame the other side, the politicians win and are able to keep spending our money. These "fiscal cliff" talks and all the cuts they want won't even begin to touch our debt. We need real cuts and I'm not talking about "entitlements". Everyone hates congress, yet keep voting for the same people over and over. It boggles the mind...