Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Published on October 30, 2007 By COL Gene In Politics

This is the cry of most Republicans and some Democrats. It is time to stop making this generalized statement and take an HONEST look at the Federal Budget. To help with that please take a look at the following Web Site: www.thebudgetgraph.com . It will give you a very clear picture of just where the Federal Government is spending YOUR tax dollars.

I have looked at this issue as well at the major issues that face our country and will impact spending for the foreseeable future. The objective was to see just where the spending cuts can be made to solve the nation’s fiscal problems.

First we need to understand ALL Federal spending falls into one of two types. One is “mandatory spending” and the other is termed “discretionary spending”. Both types have been increasing at a fast pace. When we talk about cutting the budget we must understand the items which are mandatory are NOT subject to cutting without violating promises that have been made by the Government of the United States. The three biggest elements in this category are Interest on the National Debt, Medicare and Social Security. In round numbers that mandatory spending is about $2 Trillion Dollars per year.

The other category is discretionary spending and is made up of elements that CAN be cut without violating the promises made by our country. The amount of that type of spending is about $800 Billion per year. If you fail to look at what is included in that $800 Billion one can come to the conclusion we can solve our fiscal problems by simply cutting this discretionary spending. Now it is time to take a look at the budget graph I referenced.

You will see the largest element in that category which comprises more then half of discretionary spending is National Defense. Another large component is Homeland Security. Help for the poor for Food Stamps and Medicaid rounds out the major items. These three make up MOST of the discretionary spending.

Let’s take a look at the largest spending items within the budget and the prospect for cutting them in the future.

Mandatory Items:

Social Security- this will increase at a growing rate as the Baby Boomers retire which will start in February 2008.

Medicare – This will increase for the same reason as Social Security plus the addition of the Prescription Drug Program and the increasing cost of health care. This will increase far more then Social Security.

Interest – This will continue to increase so long as we add to the National Debt. The national debt on Sept 30, 2006 was $8.5 Trillion. The National Debt on September 30, 2007 was $9 Trillion. Despite the lie Bush told that the annual deficit was $168 Billion that actual amount we added to the total debt was $500 Billion in FY 2007. Go to the U.S. Treasury web site for the actual amounts to the penny.

Discretionary Items:

National Defense – That will increase substantially because of the increase in the Active Duty strength, pay increases and because of the replacement of most of the equipment for the ground forces.

VA- This will expand in a major way to pay for the injured veterans from the Iraq war.

Homeland Security - That will need to increase as we build the border fence and add the needed border guards. The new equipment and new ID cards and systems will also require added spending. The Coast Guard will see an increase in spending as will federal law enforcement and intelligence services.

Medicaid - As more and more people are becoming eligible and medical cost increase, the cost of this program will increase.

Pell Grants – The lower interest rates for student loans will increase the overall cost of this program.

Federal Road and Bridge maintenance – This will increase given the condition of the ageing roads and bridges.

The above are the areas that surely will require added spending. These items make up the BULK of the overall spending. When you look at the magnitude of these items it will not be a surprise that spending will continue to increase. I would like to have ANYONE provide specifics as to where and by how much the so called “spending cuts” can take place that will both balance the budget and then provide a REAL Surplus to be used to pay down the over $9 Trillion dollar national debt.


The time has passed for statements like - “the problem is our Spending”. We need to provide specifics areas and amounts where spending can be CUT to come up with the money needed to balance the budget and begin paying down the debt! I believe the chance of spending cuts solving our fiscal problems to be about the same as winning the Power Ball Lottery! Remember, mandatory spending is just that!

Comments (Page 3)
11 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Oct 31, 2007
Rents are $900 per month with utilities of another $150 per month. Families earning that amount need help and they will never have $8,000 for health insurance. YOU are the one full of BS. If you are a person with incomes anything like this and support Bush, you are a complete IDIOT!


Ah yes, typical gene response, insult after insult.

$900 a month!  LOL.

You can get apartments for $400-$500 a month, they might not be the greatest, but they are a home.  You have already been debunked on your insurance BS.

Just admit you want people to be supported by government.
on Oct 31, 2007
$900/month? I raised 4 kids, lived in apartments the whole time and never spent more than $600/month... even in Pacific Grove, California. You do think like an officer, don't you.
on Oct 31, 2007






Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
The way the budget was balanced in 2000 is because of the Bush 41 Tax increase and the drastic cut in military spending coupled with almost a decade of economic growth. That economic growth took place WITH THE HIGHER taxes that were in place during the Clinton years.


Again, you ignore the fact that there is more in the treasury now than when Clinton was in office. Why do you claim that Clinton could balance the budget, but now that the treasury is up to $700 Billion it just can't be done?

“Either Clinton DIDN'T actually balance the budget, or it CAN be done now. Either way, your contradictions expose your ignorance.”

That is NOT correct. In 2001 we had a debt of $5.7 Trillion. That means we not only did not have anything in the Treasury as you state but were in the hole of $5.7 Trillion. Today we are in a far deeper hole- Over $9 Trillion. We spend more EVERY year then we take in. Please show me where all this money is you claim the Treasury has? They handle more dollars but they simply comes in and go out FASTER then they come in!!!!! You are a simpleton.
on Oct 31, 2007

I wrote about this before:

http://draginol.joeuser.com/articlecomments.asp?AID=139446&s=1

the site isn't up anymore but it wasn't difficult to eliminate the deficit by making cuts in federal education spending, medicaid, and other federal programs for "the poor".

Those are definitely not mandatory programs.

on Oct 31, 2007
OK, I've had just about enough of your BS Col gene. You better be prepared to own up to your own words when I start throwing them in your face you hypocrite.

I have no idea nor do I support any new programs that we can not pay for and until we pay for what we are doing.


You lying Son of a (beep). Let me line up all your articles that disprove this BS reply of yours:

Congress Responds to S-CHIP Concerns

NOW Bush Threatens to VETO the Farm Bill

Bush Threatens Veto of Border Protection

Bush Veto of Supplemental will Deny Troop Funding

Time to Approve Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research


These are all articles you wrote where you had no care over more spending while at the same time you decried articles like this one. Your a hypocrite Col, nothing more, nothing less.

on Oct 31, 2007

Reply By: CharlesCS1 Posted: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
OK, I've had just about enough of your BS Col gene. You better be prepared to own up to your own words when I start throwing them in your face you hypocrite.


I have no idea nor do I support any new programs that we can not pay for and until we pay for what we are doing.


You lying Son of a (beep). Let me line up all your articles that disprove this BS reply of yours: YOU are the lying SOB

Congress Responds to S-CHIP Concerns. That was funded by an increase in the cigarette tax.

NOW Bush Threatens to VETO the Farm Bill. The Farm Bill would have lowered the subsidy by cutting off subsidies for people making over $500,000

Bush Threatens Veto of Border Protection. This is an area where we must spend more for our security and is the reason I favor increasing the tax rates on the wealthy.

Bush Veto of Supplemental would Deny Troop Funding. I said Bush threatened to veto a bill giving our troops an added 1% pay increase. Bush can allow private contractors in Iraq who are paid 4-6 TIMES what we pay our military to perform the same function but Bush would veto an added 1% of our military!


Time to Approve Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research. That is a health issue and yes I believe that is more important then giving tax Cuts to the wealthy and the Big Oil companies!
on Oct 31, 2007
Idiot!

By your "logic" if you have a mortgage you can't possibly have money in the bank.

I did a little checking around the net. In 2006, the total revenue of the US Treasury was 2,500,000,000,000, the highest since 2000. After 2000, when Clinton's tax increases and the recession affected the economy negatively, the total revenues dropped to just under 2,000,000,000,000. Since 2003 the total federal revenues has increased. Which proves that tax increases decrease revenues, tax cuts incease revenues. Check out the chart: Chart (wouldn't it be great if YOU learned how to use links instead of making anyone interested to cut and paste the URLs you cite?)


btw, Clinton NEVER actually Balance the budget, he merely stated that he did and idiots like you believed it. After all, Clinton wouldn't lie, right?
on Oct 31, 2007




Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Idiot!

By your "logic" if you have a mortgage you can't possibly have money in the bank.

YOU COULD but the U.S. does not! In fact the Comptroller General has been showing just how many Trillions of dollars we have committed without the money to pay for those commitments. We are like a person who pays cash for about 80% of what they buy and put the other 20% on their credit card. How long do you think YOU could do that?
on Oct 31, 2007
That is not "fact". Most of the poor are just lazy and leech off the government, and don't want to help themselves. Charity could easily cover people who genuinely need help.



i disagree with this mostly. when the old welfare program was running. if you went out and got a job on the last day of the month and you reported it as you legally had to that day. the welfare program would cut you off right then. meaning you now had no money to pay your rent or to buy food. if you waited until you got paid. you then had repay that money now or take a chance on going to jail for fraud.
on Nov 01, 2007
The welfare reform has helped insure that help goes to those the both need it and are not abusing the system. However the real issue is this:

In fact the Comptroller General has been showing just how many Trillions of dollars we have committed without the money to pay for those commitments. We are like a person who pays cash for about 80% of what they buy and put the other 20% on their credit card.

There are areas where we can cut and eliminate spending that is not needed. However, the amount of money needed will not come only from cutting pork and some programs that we can do without. To solve the problem we will need to BOTH cut spending and increase tax revenue. Anyone that claims otherwise has not taken an honest look at the budget nor just how much of a difference there is between the tax revenue and the spending even after the cuts that can be made.
on Nov 01, 2007
. Anyone that claims otherwise has not taken an honest look at the budget nor just how much of a difference there is between the tax revenue and the spending even after the cuts that can be made.


Yes we have.  You are obsessed with taxing that you ignore everything else.

Just like the rest of your "facts"....debunked again.


on Nov 01, 2007
To solve the problem we will need to BOTH cut spending and increase tax revenue.




as long as every program has an auto raise in funds every year. there will never be a balanced budget. even if taxes were 100%. so to solve the problem we need to freeze everything where they are now including taxes.
on Nov 01, 2007
Congress Responds to S-CHIP Concerns. That was funded by an increase in the cigarette tax.

NOW Bush Threatens to VETO the Farm Bill. The Farm Bill would have lowered the subsidy by cutting off subsidies for people making over $500,000

Bush Threatens Veto of Border Protection. This is an area where we must spend more for our security and is the reason I favor increasing the tax rates on the wealthy.

Bush Veto of Supplemental would Deny Troop Funding. I said Bush threatened to veto a bill giving our troops an added 1% pay increase. Bush can allow private contractors in Iraq who are paid 4-6 TIMES what we pay our military to perform the same function but Bush would veto an added 1% of our military!


Time to Approve Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research. That is a health issue and yes I believe that is more important then giving tax Cuts to the wealthy and the Big Oil companies!


This just goes to show your stupidity; you decry that we spend to much and your solution is to add more to the debt and balance it by raising taxes. God, your logic is so stupid it's no wonder this country is so screwed up. And here I thought you wanted to raise taxes to pay off the debt. How the hell do you expect to lower the debt when you are adding programs that will swallow up the taxes you wish to increase? Or is your whole idea to just increase taxes till you cant tax no more? You need to stop playing with you copy of SimCity 4, you can't just raise taxes the same way you do in the game.

YOU are the lying SOB


BTW, I never called you an SOB. I may have come close but did not say it so I think you own me an apology.
on Nov 01, 2007
NONE of you has shown where we will cut $700 Billion per year from the budget to solve our fiacal problems. What is the Problem?




Col Gene,

Politics aside, the fact remains that the U.S Government (notice how I'm not pointing fingers at a particular individual?) lowered taxes by a MASSIVE amount and then invaded two countries, both of which required literally shipping pallets of cash overseas. Even if the U.S were to decide to leave Iraq tomorrow by the time all was said and done with getting the troops and materiel home, total cost of the Iraq invasion and occupation would come to around a trillion dollars by most estimates. If the U.S stays there longer it will easily pass the trillion dollar mark.

This isn't even taking into consideration the massive additional spending on

A) Defense contractors at home, who are producing the tanks, aircraft and support systems (cause you know that all those F-35's are needed to fight the box-cutter weilding terrorists, it has nothing to do with preparing for a future title fight with China)

"Homeland security" contracts, which means many, many, private security companies getting loads of your tax money from the U.S Gov to help "secure the homeland" with domestic surveillance of your own citizens

So in quick summary-

Lower the taxes significantly, reducing the amount of money the gov. gets, then go to war which will massively increase necessary expenditures, making sure to contract out as much as possible to private companies on cost-plus arrangements (quite often on no-bid contracts) further increasing the amount of public money that goes into private hands.

How does this all get paid for?

By countries like China, Japan and the U.K buying your debt. That's right, this entire war the U.S has been fighting is going on the biggest VISA bill in history and foreign nations are the credit card company. Thing is, they're only footing the bill because they've been buying such large amounts of U.S securities, largely because oil is traded around the world with U.S dollars. But as of late these countries have all been quietly dumping their stocks of U.S currency, in august China dumped more than 160 billion U.S for other currencies. This is part of the reason why the dollar is dropping at a precipitous rate and will soon be DOA with the feds' latest quarter point interest rate cut to speed along it's death. Now all these other countries won't dump their U.S dollars all in one go because that would be too big of a shock to the global economy, but mark my words they are doing it, just more gradually. What this means is that you are gradually going to see your dollar drop and drop- kind of like watching a slow motion train wreck. By the time the shite really hits the fan though, the present administration will be out of office and can say "hey, things were fine on our watch!"
on Nov 01, 2007
Look gene, you got yourself a fan, your evil twin brother Artysim. But if he's your evil twin, what does that make you? The other black sheep?
11 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last