"Ed Huntress" wrote:


"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
Cliff wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 04:52:53 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 04:08:46 -0700 (PDT), "Kennewick Man; the first,
the BEST!" wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:39 am, Cliff
wrote:
http://tv.gawker.com/5610818/jon-ste...inancial-idioc
y... "Jon Stewart Exposes the Financial Idiocy of Sarah Palin,
John Boehner, and Other Republicans"
[
Tonight, a freshly-shaved Jon Stewart talked about the fact that
Republicans are simultaneously complaining about the nation's
deficit and fighting to extend Bush's tax cuts (which, if ended,
would reduce said deficit by 30%). Inside, video of the smackdown.
]
See video.

As opposed to the man in the White House who has bankrupted the U.S.?


If the Kenyan hadnt ****ed up the economy..they wouldnt need to raise
taxes.

The 11+ trillion in debts was bushco & the rethggery.

You still spreading that bull****? Or are you ready to claim that the
debt by Obama is almost 14T?

The national debt through FY 2009, which was Bush's last budget, was $11.9T.
At the time of his first budget (which began in Oct. 2001), it had been
$5.8T.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo5.htm

Now, as of 4:16 PM g, it's $13.3T.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

So the question is, what the heck are you talking about, RD, when you say
"the debt by Obama"? Most economists attribute the huge runup in debt under
Bush to three things: two unfunded wars, Medicare enhancements, and tax cuts
for the well-off.

For the record, we've been over this with you before. Fortunately, several
people here are patient. d8-)



I got this from the site. Looks like 2007-2008 budget year is when it started going off
the rails. 08-09 a bit steeper and 09-7/10 just slightly less than preceding year. Sorry
this isn't a binary group, I'm looking at a excell chart of the data.


Individual months picked from another section of site.
One such link: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...opds072009.pdf

7/10 13,185,208 in Millions
1/10 12,222,507
7/09 11,611,178
1/09 10,569,310


09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

Ed, is this debt including social security payouts causing the government to borrow to pay
out benefits?

Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
news
"Ed Huntress" wrote:


"RD Sandman" wrote in message
.. .
Cliff wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 04:52:53 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 04:08:46 -0700 (PDT), "Kennewick Man; the first,
the BEST!" wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:39 am, Cliff
wrote:
http://tv.gawker.com/5610818/jon-ste...inancial-idioc
y... "Jon Stewart Exposes the Financial Idiocy of Sarah Palin,
John Boehner, and Other Republicans"
[
Tonight, a freshly-shaved Jon Stewart talked about the fact that
Republicans are simultaneously complaining about the nation's
deficit and fighting to extend Bush's tax cuts (which, if ended,
would reduce said deficit by 30%). Inside, video of the smackdown.
]
See video.

As opposed to the man in the White House who has bankrupted the U.S.?


If the Kenyan hadnt ****ed up the economy..they wouldnt need to raise
taxes.

The 11+ trillion in debts was bushco & the rethggery.

You still spreading that bull****? Or are you ready to claim that the
debt by Obama is almost 14T?

The national debt through FY 2009, which was Bush's last budget, was
$11.9T.
At the time of his first budget (which began in Oct. 2001), it had been
$5.8T.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ebt_histo5.htm

Now, as of 4:16 PM g, it's $13.3T.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

So the question is, what the heck are you talking about, RD, when you say
"the debt by Obama"? Most economists attribute the huge runup in debt
under
Bush to three things: two unfunded wars, Medicare enhancements, and tax
cuts
for the well-off.

For the record, we've been over this with you before. Fortunately, several
people here are patient. d8-)



I got this from the site. Looks like 2007-2008 budget year is when it
started going off
the rails. 08-09 a bit steeper and 09-7/10 just slightly less than
preceding year. Sorry
this isn't a binary group, I'm looking at a excell chart of the data.

When you say "going off the rails," what you're seeing is the effect of
bailouts and the stimulus, accompanied by low tax receipts that are due to
two causes: a slumping economy, and the lowest overall tax rates since 1954.
Deficit spending while you're cutting taxes is going to pile up a heap of
debt -- ala Reagan and Bush, at times when the economy was *not* in a
recession and, thus, it made no sense; and under Obama, when we *are* in a
recession and there is no other known way to avoid spiraling deflation.



Individual months picked from another section of site.
One such link:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...opds072009.pdf

7/10 13,185,208 in Millions
1/10 12,222,507
7/09 11,611,178
1/09 10,569,310


09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

Ed, is this debt including social security payouts causing the government
to borrow to pay
out benefits?

The government has never had to borrow to pay out SS benefits. So the answer
is, no.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Ed, is this debt including social security payouts causing the government
to borrow to pay
out benefits?

The government has never had to borrow to pay out SS benefits. So the answer
is, no.


I *thought* ss reciepts had been overtaken by payments this year?

Where is the money?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/bu.../25social.html

Oh, glad to see you made it home okay.

Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Ed, is this debt including social security payouts causing the
government
to borrow to pay
out benefits?

The government has never had to borrow to pay out SS benefits. So the
answer
is, no.


I *thought* ss reciepts had been overtaken by payments this year?

It hasn't happened yet, Wes. Even when it does, it will have no significant
effect on the debt for a long time to come. But you're looking at the
sources of the national debt, and this one has *not* come into play. Not one
dollar of the debt reflects a SS income shortage.


Where is the money?

Which money are you speaking of? The money to pay SS? It comes from current
SS revenue, as always. So far. g


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/bu.../25social.html

Note that they say "projected," and that not everyone agrees. Recessions are
a big hit on SS, with revenues down and people taking early retirement. It
will swing up and down with the economy for some years to come.


Oh, glad to see you made it home okay.

Thanks. Fierce rainstorms really slowed us down. I got to share a beer with
Iggy while I was out there, and to see his amazing "hobby" project. He's
really built that Series II back from the ground up -- the electronics,
anyway.

--
Ed Huntress

On Aug 22, 6:35*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

I *thought* ss reciepts had been overtaken by payments this year?

It hasn't happened yet, Wes. Even when it does, it will have no significant
effect on the debt for a long time to come. But you're looking at the
sources of the national debt, and this one has *not* come into play. Not one
dollar of the debt reflects a SS income shortage.


Which money are you speaking of? The money to pay SS? It comes from current
SS revenue, as always. So far. g



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/bu.../25social.html

Note that they say "projected," and that not everyone agrees. Recessions are
a big hit on SS, with revenues down and people taking early retirement. It
will swing up and down with the economy for some years to come.


Ed Huntress

It has pretty much already happened. The fiscal year is almost over.
New fiscal year starts Oct. 1. And it is already affecting the
National Debt. Not because the receipts are so much less than the
payments, but because the budget has been relying on a Social Security
surplus for years. Now there is no surplus to use for other
programs. Congress will do something to ensure that there is a Social
Security surplus soon.

Dan