By election time the U.S. will be burdened with a $16 trillion debt -- a number larger than our annual economy. Perhaps this is what the "end of the world in December of 2012" is really all about. I worry about whether any of the Republican candidates can handle the crisis, and IMO Obama will further aggravate the situation. Republican candidates are committed to a "no new taxes" policy while Obama is committed to a "bigger more consumptive government" policy. Neither policy will work. At this point, we need some of Ron Paul's reduction of government/spending, some of Newt's political savvy and intellect, some of Romney's business experience and some of Obama's tax increase mindset. While Obama is a walking, talking disaster whom I will vote against regardless of who runs against him, I fear the current Republican field is scarcely better equipped to handle the crisis. As a retiree, I worry. Do you?
I'm very worried. Obama doesn't know what he's doing, that's for sure. My advice to you, as a retiree, would be to protect yourself vs. inflation. Given the political gridlock that exists in Washington (and Europe), the politically expedient answer to debt problems is to print money as an escape. This has been happening for a while now. Look at inflation resistant investments like real estate, hard assets, equities of companies with pricing power and TIPS.
nope! Obama seeks new power to merge agencies Stepping firmly onto Republican turf, President Barack Obama will announce Friday that he will ask Congress for the power to merge agencies to streamline government and improve efficiency. First up on his list: merging six different independent trade, business and commerce agencies, including most of the functions of the Commerce Department, the Small Business Administration and the Office of the U.S. Trade representative, into a new, unnamed Cabinet agency to create a more efficient experience for entrepreneurs and business managers. “The government we have is not the government we need. The last reorganization of the whole government was done by Herbert Hoover,” Jeff Zients, deputy director for management and chief performance officer at the Office of Management and Budget, told reporters. “Since then, agencies have been layered on top.”
Then get us a credible, intelligent, savvy Democratic candidate ... because that definitely is not Obama.
If we stop having r****ds who think the national debt is analogous balancing a checkbook vote, it will go a long way.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/13/obama-tries-to-copy-paul/ OBAMA TRIES TO COPY RON PAUL Just like most of the Republican presidential candidates, President Obama really isn’t going to consolidate government or cut spending. But also like them, the President apparently thinks it’s important to try to sound like Ron Paul. Paul’s budget plan eliminates five federal departments, transferring some functions to other departments, allowing for $1 trillion to be cut in the first year. Reports The Washington Post: President Obama will ask Congress on Friday for the power to consolidate parts of the federal government, proposing a first step of combining several trade- and commerce-related agencies under a plan that the White House said could eliminate more than 1,000 jobs and save $3 billion over 10 years. A senior administration official said the White House proposal is Obama’s follow-through on his promise during last year’s State of the Union address to create a leaner, more efficient bureaucracy… Obama will propose combining the functions and staff of six trade- and commerce-related agencies and offices: the Small Business Administration; the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative; the Export-Import Bank; the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; and the Trade and Development Agency… “The government we have is not the government we need,” Zients said during a briefing for reporters before Obama’s announcement, which is scheduled for 11:20 a.m. “The last major reorganization of the whole government was done more than half a century ago by Herbert Hoover. Since then, agencies have been layered on top. Rarely has an agency been downsized or eliminated.” $3 billion in cuts. Ha! The Washington Post notes: While symbolically important–especially because reform efforts by previous White House administrations have mostly failed–the consolidations would barely dent the number of workers and the amount of spending in the country’s vast federal bureaucracy.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np According to the debt figures posted by the U.S. Treasury, Obama's on pace to borrow $6.2 trillion in one term -- more than all presidents from Washington thru Clinton combined. This is the same guy that called Bush "unpatriotic" for adding trillions to the debt... <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DyLmru6no4U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> That being said, Ron Paul 2012.
That's a shock. As president, you can call on any and all advice. The folks who are consulting are generally considered the best and brightest in American (if not Austrian) economics. I agree though that in the fog of economics and with unintended consequences, not to mention the total self interest of Corporate profits, the courses and outcomes are not cut and dried. And, a huge portion of the factors are beyond the influence of the American Executive Branch. Staving off depression though has been job#1. It is the moral equivalent of war and at this point requires the sacrifice of deficit spending. In this time of historically low interest rates, one thing I am doing is using debt to lock in the things I know I will need for the long term. I did a refi and put most of the equity cash-out back into the house to fix it up so it can go another 15 or 20 years without me having to come up with cash later when it will be more expensive i.e changing siding to hardi-plank, upgrade the A/C, water heater etc. and updating the kitchens and baths to keep the house current and easily sell-able in an emergency. I put a few grand in my old mercedes to make sure I can get another 100K miles out of it... I might have upgraded to a newer model but I think if I can wait another 3 years there will be some better mileage options. I would have paid down any higher interest debt. And, I am looking for superior income returns on my investment money, MLP's and selected corporates. Until I can see some real opportunities though, I plan on living small, no frivolous expenses. No eating out, vacations, Starbucks or $12 movies. I personally have some oil investments as my inflation hedge but other than food I really don't see much inflation. I think because the excess money in the system gets funneled to China and cannot provide excess purchasing power; but I don't know.
Sure. Finally a legitimate answer. I may not entirely agree with that approach, but thank you nonetheless.
Sorry, the math doesn't add up. Bottom line is that until a President is willing to be a one-termer and take on Mandatory spending, nothing will solve the debt problem. Ending the tax cuts, according to the President's numbers, net us $450ish billion over ten years (unless you want to also end the cuts for the poor included in them which MIGHT get you to $1 trillion/10). Our deficit LAST year was $1,300 billion. If you cut the alphabet agencies, foreign aid, all of defense (included those evil wars), student loan subsidies, AND Fannie and Freddie in their entirety you still run a deficit of around $50 billion. You can't tax your way out, and lets face, you can't really budget cut your way out either since the budget is Discretionary spending, not Mandatory. You have to grow the economy like crazy, which will greatly increase revenues (like what happened after those evil Bush tax cuts), and finally take on the big four: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Debt Interest. By 2021, just those four things will add up to about $1 trillion more than the entirety of federal spending this year. Honestly, that's one of the reasons I'd be OK with a Ron Paul Presidency. I think he'd be willing to sacrifice a second term for the long term sustainability of our country. If we don't get our fiscal house in order, it won't matter what our foreign policy is because America will cease to exist.
Do you recognize the difference is spending to stimulate the economy versus spending for a war (2 wars actually)? Why do conservatives treat this so black and white. The record spending after the depression of 1929 is looked at as a good thing as it helped the US get it's fractured economy together. But the spending for this mini-depression is looked at as a terrible thing. Can you please explain this?
Actually, the New Deal programs were not as effective at healing the economy as the onset and outbreak of World War II.
Did you just make that up? Discretionary spending - the part Obama really can influence - is the same per capita today as it was 10 years ago. Obama is the one that proposed $3 trillion in cuts (including cuts to both SS and Medicare) and $1 trillion in tax hikes to reduce the deficit - the GOP wouldn't agree to it because of their no-new-tax policy and instead only agreed to $1 trillion in cuts. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.
