• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. National Debt Tops Debt Limit

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
U.S. National Debt Tops Debt Limit - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

(AP)The latest calculation of the National Debt as posted by the Treasury Department has - at least numerically - exceeded the statutory Debt Limit approved by Congress last February as part of the Recovery Act stimulus bill.

The ceiling was set at $12.104 trillion dollars. The latest posting by Treasury shows the National Debt at nearly $12.135 trillion.

A senior Treasury official told CBS News that the department has some "extraordinary accounting tools" it can use to give the government breathing room in the range of $150-billion when the Debt exceeds the Debt Ceiling.

Were it not for those "tools," the U.S. Government would not have the statutory authority to borrow any more money. It might block issuance of Social Security checks and require a shutdown of some parts of the federal government.

Pending in Congress is a measure to increase the Debt Limit by $290 billion, which amounts to six more weeks of routine borrowing for the federal government. (The House just passed the increase, though the Senate has yet to act. It is expected to approve the measure.)

Republicans and conservative Democrats blocked moves by House leaders to pass a $1.8 trillion dollar increase in the Debt Limit so the Democratic majority would not have to face the embarrassment of raising the Debt Limit yet again before next November's midterm elections.

The Debt Limit has been raised about a hundred times since 1940, when it was $49 billion - about five days worth of federal spending now.

The White House projects a record $1.5 trillion dollars deficit this year alone, and a 5-year deficit total of $4.97 trillion.

The Debt figure goes up and down on a daily basis based on government borrowing and revenue.

Does this not just shake you to your core?

How in the world are we going to fix this?
 
Lower taxes
Seriously cut government spending
Bail on the current health care reform bills
Stop printing money at the outrageous rate in which we are
Stop bailing out every company the administration wants to take over

Just to name a few...

I agree that most of what you proposed would help reduce the national debt, but how is lowering taxes going to help? The government is in trouble because it spends more money than it brings in and you want it to bring in less? How is that supposed to help?
 
I agree that most of what you proposed would help reduce the national debt, but how is lowering taxes going to help? The government is in trouble because it spends more money than it brings in and you want it to bring in less? How is that supposed to help?

It would enable to people to pay their full tax obligation. As it is now, if they can't afford to pay it all, they usualy don't pay any. It would wind up bringing more money into the government kitty.
 
I agree that most of what you proposed would help reduce the national debt, but how is lowering taxes going to help? The government is in trouble because it spends more money than it brings in and you want it to bring in less? How is that supposed to help?

Lowering certain taxes help stimulate job growth. For example: if you are employing 150 million people at a 15% tax rate, that brings in more in taxes that if you are employing 120 million people at an 18% tax rate. Of course, if the government isn't going to seriously cut spending, it doesn't really matter what you do with the tax rate because you will never see a government surplus as it is now.
 
U.S. National Debt Tops Debt Limit - Political Hotsheet - CBS News



Does this not just shake you to your core?

How in the world are we going to fix this?

For the last decade, we have been hearing this every single year, no matter who controlled the presidency or congress. And the fix? Hell, that is easy. Just unelect every Democrat and Republican who now holds office. Actually, its easy to say, but so many sheep stand in the way..... Damn, I'm a poet. :mrgreen:
 


I don't think so.

What's my "core"?

[url=http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/16/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5987341.shtml]How in the world are we going to fix this?

Rope is cheap, the Washington monument is tall, plenty of room for 535 examples for the next people we send to Washington.

Then again, if we're taking them up the Washington Monument, we don't really need rope, do we?

Seriously, though, there's two ways to do this. The hard way and the easy way.

The hard way is to elect an American president next time, we should be done with these socialists by now, right? Raise your hand if you're tired of all these god damned socialists wrecking the country.

While you're at it, elect enough American Congressmen to pass a Line Item Veto Amendment, and an Amendment mandating that each spending item in a bill have it's Constitutional origins listed for easy reference. Add an Amendment requiring super majorities to raise taxes, and that income tax should be a completely flat tax with no deductions for any damn thing at all.

The easy way is to move the tax filing deadline to Halloween, which is a scary night.....that's only a week before the Congressional elections, and require citizens to write their tax payment to the government monthly as a check or credit/debit card payment, just to make sure the people know how much their taxes really are.

Won't take long before politicians willing to reign in spending and cut taxes are elected.
 
Last edited:
Lowering certain taxes help stimulate job growth. For example: if you are employing 150 million people at a 15% tax rate, that brings in more in taxes that if you are employing 120 million people at an 18% tax rate. Of course, if the government isn't going to seriously cut spending, it doesn't really matter what you do with the tax rate because you will never see a government surplus as it is now.

Is 3% on a tiered system really going to bring in 30 million more jobs? Particularly if that is income tax, that doesn't seem likely. If we alleviated the issue of crushing medical insurance costs, then it is likely we could boost employment numbers. Decreasing personal income taxes is hardly going to do much compared to reducing costs that are directly tied to new jobs. Reducing worker's comp, health insurance costs, unemployment and FICA would IMO do far more for jobs then any minor cut in personal earned income tax rates.
 
Lower taxes

Might be possible if.....

Seriously cut government spending

We were not in a recession. Combined with a democratic majority better keep dreaming.

Bail on the current health care reform bills

Nothing is better than something? Nobody should have to go broke because they cannot afford health care. That is my opinion; how we achieve such a scenario is another topic in itself.

Stop printing money at the outrageous rate in which we are

Do you own stock/have a 401k derived in equities?

Stop bailing out every company the administration wants to take over

The failure of major financial institutions creates systemic risk. A complete failure of the system cannot be risked. Ever....
 
We're not going to fix it. We're going to run it into the ground, then it will fix itself. The hard way.
 
Is 3% on a tiered system really going to bring in 30 million more jobs? Particularly if that is income tax, that doesn't seem likely. If we alleviated the issue of crushing medical insurance costs, then it is likely we could boost employment numbers. Decreasing personal income taxes is hardly going to do much compared to reducing costs that are directly tied to new jobs. Reducing worker's comp, health insurance costs, unemployment and FICA would IMO do far more for jobs then any minor cut in personal earned income tax rates.

I didn't just say cut payroll taxes. There are many other taxes that need cut, but this administration is wanting to increase them further (take corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, energy taxes, etc...).

Medical insurance costs can easily be alleviated - pass TORT reform and loosen the regulations on insurance companies (allow insurance companies to do business in every state). More than 70% of Americans are happy with their quality of healthcare and healthcare coverage - link. Combine TORT reform and de-regulating the medical insurance industry and you will see the percentage of those happy with their medical costs increase tremendously.

And as far as doing something for unemployment, the Obama administration is going about it all wrong. Small businesses make up 99.7% of all employers. They employ half of private sector workers. They provide more than 60% of new jobs annually and produce a GDP of roughly 6 trillion dollars - link. And yet Obama does not invite anyone representing the small business market to his "Job Summit". Who does he invite instead? He invites unions, three mayors and Paul Krugman? His cabinet boasts the lowest percentage of people with private sector experience in the last 100+ years - link:

20091130_private_sector_exp_cabinet_sec.jpg


Bottom line, Obama doesn't know what he is doing. How can you leave out the entire small business community from a jobs summit? That would be like me hosting a basketball summit and only inviting people with experience in football, soccer, baseball and Stephen King (to cover the Paul Krugman invite). Anyone that can pass a high school economics class can look at what this administration is doing and shake their head in disbelief. Obama is harming the economy at an unprecedented rate. And just to be fair, this all started with Bush. Obama is merely accelerating the rate at which it is being destroyed.

I'll leave you with this quote (Washington Post op-ed piece discussing the stimulus bill):

"Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

That's why I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress. With it, we will create or save more than 3 million jobs over the next two years, provide immediate tax relief to 95 percent of American workers, ignite spending by businesses and consumers alike, and take steps to strengthen our country for years to come." - President Barack Obama, Feb. 5, 2009 - link
 
Hey, it's only 1.2 billion dollars a day in interest! Just pocket change.

Check out what CNN is saying here.

And here's the national debt clock they are talking about

It's merely a little over $111 grand per taxpayer. You can afford that, right?

How much is 12 trillion dollars?

If you were the most generous employer in history, with 1,000 employees making an average of $1,000 per hour, your payroll would be a million dollars an hour, or 40 million for a 40 hour week. Your payroll would be just over $2 billion a year.

At that rate, you would be in business for nearly six thousand years before paying out 12 trillion.

Do the math and see.
 

Not really. Our debt is mostly in our own currency, and it's not dangerously high as a percentage of our GDP. Many other countries have historically had debt levels much higher than ours currently is, and have not had credit troubles.

Erod said:
How in the world are we going to fix this?

Well, in the long term we're going to need to balance the budget, obviously. In the short term, our main focus should be on keeping the economic recovery going. This means keeping taxes low and spending high...which will obviously make the deficit balloon.
 
Medical insurance costs can easily be alleviated - pass TORT reform and loosen the regulations on insurance companies (allow insurance companies to do business in every state). More than 70% of Americans are happy with their quality of healthcare and healthcare coverage

I'm not sure about the TORT reform. I'd need to see actual impact upon costs to insurance. However, I'd agree with you on regulations reducing the economies of scale.

And as far as doing something for unemployment, the Obama administration is going about it all wrong.

Perhaps, but individually, small business have relatively weak power. Large corporate moves could produce larger changes that would trick down. And the extension of benefits is a good thing as it's one of the few surefire methods of pumping money into the economy. The problem with giving many people with jobs tax cuts is that they save it. It's primarily why Bush's 2007 tax cuts utterly failed. They didn't get spent. However, those without jobs do spend at higher rates.

Bottom line, Obama doesn't know what he is doing.

I think you place too much power in the office. Remember the President doesn't control the purse strings, only the capacity to veto. Granted, this started under Bush and had the foundation in Clinton, but the president doesn't have as much power as many people think he does.

The stimulus is not a stimulus as it was not timely. I don't know how many times I have to say that.
 
I'm not sure about the TORT reform.

You must not see those commercials about "Have you taken such-and-such medicine recently? Did you suffer any of these 400 symptoms or did your loved one die? You MAY be entitled to a large chunk of money in a class action lawsuit (that we'll just take a modest portion of!)"


well...that last part is the hidden message....
 
You must not see those commercials about "Have you taken such-and-such medicine recently? Did you suffer any of these 400 symptoms or did your loved one die? You MAY be entitled to a large chunk of money in a class action lawsuit (that we'll just take a modest portion of!)"


well...that last part is the hidden message....

I know it has an effect, but just how much is the question. I've been around the block to know that often the most famous reason is not the real problem.
 
I know it has an effect, but just how much is the question. I've been around the block to know that often the most famous reason is not the real problem.


Well when you allow lawyers to rape Doctors and Pharmaceutical companies, especially in class action suits, they either go under (decreasing supply and increasing demand) or most likely they pass the cost on to the consumer. And if said consumer has insurance, they're going to pass that on to them anyways in higher premiums for said procedure or medicine or an increase in policy cost.
 
Well when you allow lawyers to rape Doctors and Pharmaceutical companies, especially in class action suits, they either go under (decreasing supply and increasing demand) or most likely they pass the cost on to the consumer. And if said consumer has insurance, they're going to pass that on to them anyways in higher premiums for said procedure or medicine or an increase in policy cost.

But that doesn't address my point. I'm not rejecting that the named things in your posts are expensive. I'm merely questioning their total impact. Just because a very public incident is expensive does not logically conclude it is the real problem.
 
"Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

Barack Obama
2006
 
"Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

Barack Obama
2006

Yes Americans do deserve better. Too bad we got worse.
 
Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when Bush was in office and he spent along with his Republican congress, like a drunken sailor.

Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when it was them that were "uping" the debt limit 4 times from 2001 to 2006 and 7 times in total under Bush.

Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when the US national debt went up 100% in the 8 years of the Bush administration.

Funny how conservatives have no solutions to the problems they at least in a big part caused... yes doing the tired old "tax cuts" bit is not a solution if you keep spending increases.. we knew that before Bush and that was yet again confirmed under Bush.

If you listen to conservatives, you could cure cancer by cutting taxes..
 
Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when Bush was in office and he spent along with his Republican congress, like a drunken sailor.

Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when it was them that were "uping" the debt limit 4 times from 2001 to 2006 and 7 times in total under Bush.

Funny how there was no outcry by conservatives when the US national debt went up 100% in the 8 years of the Bush administration.

Funny how conservatives have no solutions to the problems they at least in a big part caused... yes doing the tired old "tax cuts" bit is not a solution if you keep spending increases.. we knew that before Bush and that was yet again confirmed under Bush.

If you listen to conservatives, you could cure cancer by cutting taxes..

Oh how ironic.

"2006 Obama: "Raising the debt ceiling (Bush) shows a failure of leadership," 2009 Obama: We need to raise the debt ceiling"

Guess Obama is showing a "failure of leadership".

Its also funny how liberals moaned and complained when the debt ceiling was raised during the Bush administration but expects people to not moan and complain under Obama's administration for the same thing.
 
Oh how ironic.

"2006 Obama: "Raising the debt ceiling (Bush) shows a failure of leadership," 2009 Obama: We need to raise the debt ceiling"

Guess Obama is showing a "failure of leadership".

Its also funny how liberals moaned and complained when the debt ceiling was raised during the Bush administration but expects people to not moan and complain under Obama's administration for the same thing.

Dont get me wrong.. I actually agree with you. While Obama is going the right way he has showed at times "failure of leadership". But in this case I dont see how Obama had any choice what so ever. Bush DID have a choice in all the 7 times he got the debt ceiling raised.

But that does not change the fact that most conservatives today blame Obama for most if not all of the debt, and that is so factually wrong. They gloss over the fact that of the 12 trillion at least 5 if not 6 trillion came during Bush's watch with a Republican (conservative) run Congress. In there lies not only the irony but the hypocrisy as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom