Obama seeks $1.2 trillion debt ceiling increase

Obama and the liberals like to crow about how nicely the economy is "recovering", but from the beginning it's been bought with "stimulus" fraud, reckless money-printing by the Fed, and staggering amounts of increasing debt. As it is, Obama ran up the debt more in his first three years than "W" Bush did in both of his four-years terms in office!

Now President Kick-the-Can wants yet ANOTHER $1.2 Trillion dollars to prop up this, uh, "recovery" and cover is own ass through the election! After three years of plunging headlong into an abyss of debt at a speed never dreamed of before, some people still do not know what "Keynesian economic theory" is... well, it is synonymous with OBAMA (and the people in the Federal Reserve System who pull his strings).

Links? No problem:

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-seeks-1-2-trillion-debt-limit-rise-021000271.html

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/27/news/economy/obama_debt_ceiling/index.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...2-trillion-increase-in-debt-limit-dec-30.html

These Keynesians and their stooge, Obama, are like a bunch of idiotic, pimple-headed teenagers who've been turned loose with Mommy and Daddy's credit cards. They will destroy us with their stupidity, but fortunately, there's just a chance that Republicans may be able to put a stop to this madness: http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...s-debt-limit/2012/01/18/gIQAPP9K7P_story.html

 

Every President before Obama = $10 Trillion (D)ebt

4 Years of President Obama= $6 Trillion (D)ebt
.
.
.
..........and Obama wants to spend even more.
.
.
.

 

All this with out the Senate passing a budget for how long........

 

cutting waste and demanding higher productivity from govt workers was never a consideration.

Nope, let's go deeper into debt

hey Harry!!! where's the budget??????

 

And this from the president who promised to cut the deficit in half in four years, and said Bush running up $4 trillion in debt was "unpatriotic".

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/...ding-4-trillion-to-national-debt-unpatriotic/

We simply cannot afford 4 more years of Obamunism. As is stands, it's likely the damage he has caused is irreversible.

Oh and what happened to Obama going through the budget line by line to eliminate wasteful spending and projects? Not only did it not happen, but he increased wasteful spending and projects with the Porkulus bill.

 

Add to the fact the one Candidate that is talking about serious cuts is labeled a "kook".

 

Yep ... that's usually an intelligent method to begin an Adult Debate. I can see why the Congress has such a historic low, there's no one expect anything better.

Carry-on ... it's obvious that this is nothing more than another therapeutic beeaching session.

 

Adding 1.2 Trillion to our debt is a serious matter. People should be able to discuss in any manner they chose to.

 

I will say one thing for Cigar... he was the only liberal to dare to post in this thread which goes right to the heart of why Obama is such a bad president! Cigar didn't really have anything to say, but at least he showed his face, which is more than any of the other Obama fanboys and girls had the courage to do.

Why? There's no good reason in the world to jack up the debt like this, again, just to keep on "kicking the can down the road". The really awful part is that to be fair you can't even really blame Obama for this -- it's Ben Bernanke's manipulations, from end to end, from top to bottom.

Sometimes I wonder why Obama tolerates being treated like a house pet by Bernanke, Geithner, and the other schemers in this international crime syndicate of central bankers. I'd stand up and cheer Obama if he "grew a pair" and threw these bastards out... but he won't. So, it's spend, spend, spend, spend, spend and spend money we don't have! And run up more and more debt, on top of debt, on top of debt, on top of debt, on top of debt....

 

But…… the flaws in our economic system were not initiated by President Obama.

Compound interest over time will place a greater and greater burden on an economy that is closest to the next correction made necessary by very basic mathematical principles.

In some ways….. we Canadians have put ourselves in an even worse situation than America is in……. but the foundation of our problems are similar.

www.BankingSystemFlaws.blogspot.ca/

When well trained workers have high quality technology to work with then the total of all wages and benefits paid out to employees is only a fraction of the retail value of the products they produce. As a result of this fact the only way to move products out of warehouses is to extend higher and higher levels of credit. One problem with an abundance of red ink is that compound interest on all this government, business and personal debt over a period of decades will grow to astronomical levels. At this time there is approximately TEN TIMES as much debt in Canada as there is money. A simple explanation for how this happened can be seen here:
http://www.michaeljournal.org/plenty34.htm

In my opinion this rather simple mathematical problem is perhaps the number one cause of inflation in the Canadian economy over the past three decades. This is also perhaps the number one reason why our costs of production are so high and Canadian products cannot compete on the world markets as well as they could under better conditions.

From 1940 to 1970 the Government of Canada put roughly half of the total money supply into the economy through loans issued through the federally owned Bank of Canada. Provincial and municipal governments could borrow the money to build roads, schools, hospitals and sewage treatment facilities at zero or one percent interest. In 1970 we changed our system and since that time a higher and higher percentage of all government debt is financed through loans issued through privately owned banks. At this time it is ninety eight percent. This policy may be great for our banking sector but it was estimated that in the one year of 1995 alone our federal government could have saved roughly SIXTY FIVE BILLION DOLLARS in interest payments if we had gone back to creating half the total money supply through these low interest rate loans issued through the bank that is OWNED BY ALL CANADIANS.

Considering that our deficit was approximately thirty billion dollars for that year, simply by changing back to an already proven monetary and banking system, we could theoretically have had a FEDERAL BUDGET SURPLUS OF THIRTY FIVE BILLION DOLLARS in 1995.

The massive cutbacks in the Canadian military, in health care, highway construction, social programs and education were profoundly affected by these accounting practices?

So what can you and I do about this problem?…..(my primary campaign writing, 2006)

 

I bet you that this thread will get not much more traction, because an intelligent response, like your's, to the mindless Obama bashing usually turns off interest of the usual suspects very quickly.

If it were so easy to make Obama responsible for all of our economic problems, including debt...

However, the problem, as you say, is systemic, and the elephant in the room is not government debt, but private debt.

That's the problem with debt: Up to a certain level, it stimulates economic growth. However, the increasing compound interest payments eventually provide so much headwind that growth slows down or even stops. Mathematically, compound interest grows exponentially. Thus, debt also grows exponentially, as we have seen historically up to the great recession in 2008.

After 2008, private debt deleveraging set in massively, mostly through default, for which increased government spending compensated partially. Anyone would be unwise to think that a Republican president would have done things differently than Obama regarding the deficit. Without government spending, the economy would have gone to full depression mode.

 

The Yahoo link didn't work, but here's what the CNN link's headline was:

Obama seeks $1.2 trillion debt ceiling increase

Oh. Yeah. Now, that makes sense. Keeps the government from defaulting, starting another depression and gives Republicans in Congress time enough to pass legislation to adjust tax rates to pay for their two unfunded wars (closing in on $3 trillion now). Makes sense to me. Or, we can just do as most on this thread do - (*)(*)(*)(*), moan, carry on then walk away believeing their work has been accomplished. <yawn>

 

Yeah because Obama taking the nation to the 18 trillion dollar mark in grinding national debt is clearly not enough. Hell, let's shoot for 20 trillion under this president because after all it's only going to permanently be on the working backs of children yet unborn to pay off Obama's fiscal irresponsibility. Nice!

 

Hey der Gatewood - over here - it's me - da Grizz: If you want to depend on magical solutions to fix gaping holes in the budget, then trot them out, but I will point out that they haven't worked before, aren't working now and damn sure won't work in the future. THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH. Got it? You do have to pay for what you want and that's been true for a long, long time. That, friend, is reality.

 

I agree but so far this president and the Dem Party leadership do not seem to grasp that reality. Raise the debt ceiling and spend more and More and MORE! Yeah . . . because that always works out in the best interest of this nation's future. Sheesh!

 

Thank you immensely Quantum Nerd.

I am rather amazed how little attention is placed on the historical fact that President Lincoln saved American taxpayers somewhere around FOUR BILLION DOLLARS in interest payments.


http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...our-billion-dollars-how-can-we-do-2013-a.html

President Lincoln saved taxpayers four billion dollars...how can we do this in 2013?
I was given a copy of this article in 1994.

After reading this article those lectures from Economics 101, 212 and Economic History sure took on a whole new level of importance.

http://www.michaeljournal.org/lincolnkennedy.htm
Melvin Sickler:

OK, so how do we apply this information in 2013 without scaring the guys on Wallstreet, who have a tendency to go out on their balconies and jump, if investors get scared....which actually could happen even if government did something intelligent!!!!!???????

 

But that didn't fix the problem. Government spending CANNOT fix the problem.

All government spending does is... to give an analogy...

You have a patient on the table with a serious wound on his leg and he's bleeding out. He's going to die if something's not done. So what do we do? We put an IV in his arm and start pumping him with blood. Well that's all fine and dandy as long as we have blood (or in the economy's case money) to pump into the man's system. He'll continue to live as long as we artificially pump blood into him. However, as soon as we start to run out of blood (money) then the patient is going to die because we didn't ACTUALLY fix the problem that was causing the issue to begin with. We simply pumped more blood into him to sustain him for a little while longer.

That's EXACTLY what government spending did. Sure we kept the economy alive a little longer, but now not only will we have to endure the consequences of our poor decisions that put us in that position to begin with but we will now have to pay for the enormous amount of money we WASTED attempting to prop the economy up by manufacturing demand with government spending.

So we're FAR worse off now than where we were when this whole thing started simply because we attempted socialism to stabilize the economy and we wasted trillions of dollars trying to manufacture demand.

 

Again, we have two real choices - do not pay for what we get and put what we need on the national credit card; or, pay for it as we go by primarily higher taxes on those who've benefitted the most from the last 30+ years. That's it.

 

An interesting analogy!

I've been putting a lot of thought into this question, especially since 1994 and at this time one of the best answers that I can think of is&#8230;&#8230;.. a second type of currency should be used in a high percentage of communities and cities all over the USA and Canada.

http://www.politicalforum.com/econo...-north-american-economy-could-organizing.html
Volunteerism is over twenty percent of North American economy&#8230; could organizing it...
back up&#8230;&#8230; stabilize&#8230;. insure&#8230; the value of the USA dollar?

Ithaca, New York has one of the simplest and easily understood measuring instruments for economic activity imaginable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_Hours

Is it theoretically possible for a group of people to accomplish a much greater organization of volunteerism through a database that would give North America a secondary economy that we could fall back on&#8230;.. just in case?

 

The world debt bubble is the biggest threat to all countries and you laugh at it. If anything happens, there is nowhere else to go but down.

 

Well that's a much better, more sustainable solution than most of the other "solutions" I've heard. I only question if you could achieve a large enough group of the population that's willing to do this now that the entitlement mentality is so prevalent in today's society. Your solution is dependent upon the willingness of the people to actually do work.

 

Essentially, you're talking about a barter economy and I assure you, it's in full swing in many places in this country. My neighbor is/was a film produces who mostly did work on commercials for both large and small companies. He's had some physical problems so really function on the level he did before, but he does belong to a barter club and, just last week, when he had his main water line start seriously leaking between the meter and house, worked a deal with a local plumbing company, filmed the work, and will use it to produce a "barter bucks" commercial for them. Been doing it for years (I'm pretty sure they also got some nice used cars that way in the past).

 

Spend less.

 

That and we cant "default" on the debt as revenues are high enough that we could always pay off the interest budget deals or no budget deals. With the current revenue streams the only way we could "default" is if the Treasury sec decided for what ever insane reason to not pay the interest.. Sure other areas would suffer but the debt would be paid.

The "default" talking point is just that a talking point and its nothing but fear mongering as a weapon any time anyone wants to bring some sanity to our spending levels.

 

Precisely so.