Finally, although slightly tardy, B.O. has released his ideas on a budget: $3.8T USD for FY2014.

In FY2012, the deficit was around $1.1T USD and FY2011, the deficit was around $1.3T, but these numbers may vary a little here and there since final numbers take years to get and the numbers get fishy if you start to calculate inflation, the costs of money, the devaluation of money, and the long list of calculations. We all know that a $1.00USD in 1980 was worth a lot more than a USD in 2013.

What is factual is another broken campaign promise. B.O. clearly stated and promised the American voting public on Feb. 23, 2009, post the Fiscal Responsibility Summit which was one month after his inauguration, and he stated, "Today I am pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. Now, this will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we've long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay, and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control." And, he clearly stated creating a public debt is "not patriotic."

Further, seizing more and more of the public's money to move the same into the public coffers does not sound like the solution. In a nutshell, can the US government spend your money better than you? Any success stories out there with governmental spending or a governmental agency?

So far, the long list of broken promises is getting longer. And, it is becoming clearer that those who contribute to society versus those getting an entitlement are getting more and more hammered. That is, taxes are going up, health care premiums are going up, those who saved for a rainy day are seeing their savings watered down, the rich will certainly pass their heavier tax burdens onto the public ... so, will those who are the beneficiaries of the progressive redistribution of wealth agenda ever be in a position to pay back society? The war on poverty started by LBJ on January 8, 1964 has been an utter failure as suggested by many economist. To the lay person, it sure seems like a failure. In November 2012 the census folks said poverty is at its highest levels since 1993, around 16%. In 2008, it was around 13.2%.

So, if the "have-nots" become the majority of the voting public, and the candidate who promises the most gifts "wins", I wonder can the US ever make a comeback? The budget is a joke because presidential broken promises appear to be completely acceptable by a majority on this forum and the current scheme of things clearly suggests the current cycle will repeat itself for the next 8 years. If that is not a joke, then nothing is.

It's Bush's fault and the congress that was elected in 2010. Don't you listen to the news on Comedy Central like all informed people do? It would be much shorter and easier to compile a list of campaign promises that were delivered upon than ones that were broken. I can only think of one promise he did somewhat keep but then nobody thought we would be in Iraq for greater than fourteen years.

Here you go Greazzer. The Sheeple would NEVER believe that he actually said that just because you VERY accurately quoted it:

Obama Declares Plan to Cut Deficit in Half - YouTube

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

I think you will find that large amounts of the forum agree with the fiscal lunacy that is our economy. I equate it to running up 100k in debt on a credit card, and getting another to pay the first, and so on. Sooner or later we will run out of credit card companies who will issue a card, and where will the country be then?

Where I disagree with you is the surprise that any controlled spending and budget promises could possibly be kept in the first place, and that Obama really has any effective control over the spiraling debt. Every president promises to reduce the debt, and so far only one has, Clinton, for all his sexual shenanigans. But then again, when he took office, the debt was less than 5 trillion.

People also forget that of the two presidential nominees this election, only one even had a real plan that made any sense, although impossible to deliver on. Imagine where we would be with Romney and his intention to return to the same idiotic trickle down principle that made this debt so huge in the first place.

Slash spending, Slash benefits, Increase taxes on those we can (I don't care how rich you are and how much you might object, even though we are talking a small amount of revenue total, the rich can definitely help, but in order to do that, we have to have some fiscal responsibility for real from both parties, not business as usual partisan politics), bring back Ross Perot with his big ears and pie charts

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

I saw some of the highlights on Comedy Central and the commentary by some of the intellectual elite or at least those who are informed vs. the uninformed masses. I believe that was the party line on this forum by the left leaning contingent. That is, those who could be pigeon holed as conservative were declared as part of the uninformed masses. That is partially what prompted the joke motif. The budget is a joke. Actually, I was trying to get a succinct, easy to read, factually accurate evaluation of the US Dollar from 2008 to 2012. I figured the US's downgrading of its bond rating was somewhat of a red herring which most folks either ignored or did in fact blame of Bush which was humorous in and of itself. I looked at the exchange rates, treasury rates, and foreign currency reserves and the world's reserve currency breakdown. I had a thread on the latter. I was going to toss out there through my own ciphering that our dollar has lost at least 11% of its value during the last 4 years, but I could not put that together in any meaningful way. Meaningful is defined as being somewhat bullet proof from attack or commentary. I say that since I saw on this forum folks actually say B.O. has been incredibly frugal, he's really rebounding the economy, B.O. has no blame whatsoever for our fiscal woes, and the list goes on. Actually, whatever problems that exist now, they are other's fault. However, in reality, it is clear that the federal debt went from around $10T USD in 1/2009 to now $17T USD 4/13 and the projections clearly put us at $23T+ by 12/15. If that is not a long-term joke, then nothing is. Assuming at least the public debt does hit $23T by the end of 2015, our yearly interest payments will be in the ballpark of $1T USD per year. Can we inflate our way out of this mess? Will inflation or hyper inflation help the poor out ? Almost all economist uniformally state that inflation hurts the poor the most. So, is B.O. really helping his voting base?

I visualise the increasing debt to being caught on an endless escallator. Until there is just no more power available to enable it to run. Or money to buy the power.. It will always be hard to get off but the longer the ride goes on the harder it will be to deal with it and the resultant fallout.

Of course it has to be a given those excess borrowed funds will have to be extracted out of the general public in one form or another. This is another good reason to attempt to reduce the damage before it becomes real carnage.

It is becoming pretty obvious they just do not know how to even really approach the issue. Mind deal with it. Almost totally out iof control comes to mind.

The danger in the states is I think both major parties are locked into this. Wait and see is far too dangerous but it appears to be what it is. I do not consider what is occuring any form of a plan in a situation like we are observing. A plan has a known end point. This remains wait and see at best.

He did cut the deficit we inherited in half. This is a new deficit! lol

__________________
1991 560 SEL / 185k miles
1992 750il / 17k miles - project car

"Where I disagree with you is the surprise that any controlled spending and budget promises could possibly be kept in the first place, and that Obama really has any effective control over the spiraling debt."

A few observations:

1. Why make a promise if the maker knows he or she has no intentions of keeping it or perhaps the ability to keep it. Honesty is certainly good thing. If he knew in advance, then it's a lie vs. an error or mistake.

2. B.O. has a great deal of control. He has ushered in many "social welfare" programs. These government entitlements are his agenda and his policies. Folks voted him into office on these promises. He is selectively keeping this or that promise. Technically, it is congress that passes these laws, but it's somewhat disingenuous to claim that B.O. technically has zero influence or control over these issues. Why is B.O. on the campaign trail for all the entitlement programs and redistribution of wealth programs then? He seems to keep those promises.

3. How tough would it be to say the US government's revenues are around $2.5T USD and our budget will be $2.5T USD. Period. That is how we poor folks manage our households except no "T"-- not even low T. I haven't seen any campaign trail speeches by the silver tongue fox on this possible agenda. Why? He is incredibly apt to hop on the campaign trail for certain things regardless of how misguided he is.

4. I said in a post a long time ago that B.O. should seize every penny of wealth in this country. That will pay off how much debt again? And, that's only a one-shot deal so better make it count. Do you honestly think the rich will stick around for the government to take all of their money?

Actually, the long and hard truth is that our chief executive is somewhat of a disaster when it comes to our economic situation. For those on the far, far right, there is little stretch of the imagination that if you believe that B.O.'s ultimate end-game result is the restructuring of the US and its destruction. What better weapon is there than destroying the US dollar? That is the ultimate irony. That is, those who think B.O. is bad news all around are now actually seeing some real proof of it through the gradual destruction of the US dollar.

I really doubt his end game is the destruction of the US. Why? I really think he's too inept. He may be a smooth talking used car salesman, where every new agenda or topic is just another sales pitch and nothing more. I wonder what the sales pitch will be when our national debt hits the projected $23 T USD when he leaves office. He came into office at around $10T USD. What will his blame game be for the new $13T USD? He certainly cannot say it's the power of compounding interest -- the most powerful force in the universe. If so, how many will buy that one? We will need an incredible used car salesman for that lie.

I miss George W. Bush.

I would say pops is much better than B.O. His son is a different storry.

Obama does that to people.

I have made the same argument many times that the more we spend on interest on the debt the less we have to help the truly needy people that we have. Everyone also needs to keep in mind that we are paying around 1.5% interest on the most current debt, what do you think will happen when that hits 4%, and I use when not if it hits 4%.

When I was a teenager and in my early 20's, which seems like an incredibly long time ago, it was very common to make 5%+ on a simple savings account's balance. I would even venture a guess that it was perceived by the general public that making 5% on one's money savings was OK. If a person is making 1% or so on their savings, what incentive is there to save any money? Inflation will pass you by pretty quickly. Us investing dummies used to look at CDs and savings accounts, and other types of investments as the mainstay of a "portfolio" and making 5% was fine by me. Now, there is a huge disincentive and almost a penality for saving money. I wonder why? And, I bet the US would be a different place if interest rates went back to the 5% range.

You are likely referring to the early 80s, I remember thinking I could retire and live off of the interest if I had 250k in CDs and savings. In 1984 my first mortgage at 12.5% I was able to refi @ prime rate plus a half of one percent which was around 9% at that time adjusted quarterly. I think I checked the prime rate 360 times a year after that (to hungover the other 5 days a year) to check it.

Yup ... left Parris Island in 1983, still in my teens, and 5+% seemed like a lot and so did $575 a month. Now, $575 seems like peanuts. That was about $19 bucks a day in pay, plus meals and a bunk. Now, 30 years later for those entering the service, over $1,500 bucks ... So, triple the basic pay in a short 30 years.