PDA

**See This Page With Full Graphics, Pictures and Color!** CLICK HERE --> : US to hit debt ceiling! Wooooo!


abudabit
09-19-2007, 12:01 PM
WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress on Wednesday that the federal government will hit the current debt ceiling on Oct. 1.

He urged quick action to increase the limit, saying it was essential to protect the "full faith and credit" of the country, especially at a time of financial market turmoil.

The current debt limit is $8.965 trillion. Unless Congress votes to raise that ceiling, the country would be unable to borrow more money to keep the government operating and to pay debt obligations coming due. The United States has never defaulted on a debt payment but the decision on whether to raise the debt ceiling often sparks a prolonged political battle in Congress.

In his letter to congressional leaders, Paulson said that according to data now available, the Treasury expects to hit the current debt ceiling on Oct. 1 — the first day of the new federal budget year. However, that projection does not take into account maneuvers the government often has to employ of withdrawing investments from certain trust funds to create room for extra borrowing until Congress finally approves a debt increase.

"The full faith and credit of the United States, to which we all remain committed, is a national asset and a cornerstone of the global financial system," Paulson said in his letter. "In light of current developments in financial markets, which would be exacerbated by uncertainty in the Treasuries market, I urge the Senate to pass the legislation reported by the Finance Committee to increase the debt limit as soon as possible."

The Senate Finance Committee earlier this month approved increasing the limit on the national debt to $9.82 trillion. That boost of $850 billion would be the fifth increase in the government's borrowing limit since President Bush took office in 2001.

The national debt is the total accumulation of annual budget deficits, which must be financed with borrowed money.

Democrats blame Bush's tax cuts and the war in Iraq for pushing the debt to record levels. Republicans defend the tax cuts, saying the deficit is now on a downward trajectory in part because of the economic stimulus provided by the tax cuts.

The House approved an increase in the debt limit in May when it adopted the annual congressional budget resolution, but the full Senate has yet to act to raise the limit.


Just die already mother fuckers.


Yep (http://www.ronpaul2008.com)

Chino Kapone
09-19-2007, 12:38 PM
we are the naggers of the world, except we can get approved for a loan.

MrBogey
09-19-2007, 12:53 PM
Blaming the couple trillion rise in the national debt on a couple billion in tax cuts is the essence of retarded.

abudabit
09-19-2007, 01:21 PM
The estimated population of the United States is 303,028,746 so each citizen's share of this debt is $29,710.00.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $1.40 billion per day since September 29, 2006!

A mere bag of shells.

Got a problem with it? Maybe this guy can help. (http://www.ronpaul2008.com)

Fr. Dougal
09-19-2007, 01:34 PM
This is a dumb question... but who do we owe this debt to?

Banks? Other countries? Doesn't every country in the world owe us money too?

Can't we see where 2 debts are a push... and reorganize shit?

abudabit
09-19-2007, 01:45 PM
T-Bonds. Banks, investment institutions, individuals, etc. I don't know if foreign governments buy significant amounts of our T-Bonds or are even allowed to.


Update:

The Bureau of the Public Debt divides the national debt into two main categories: debt held by the public, and intragovernmental holdings (debt that the government has essentially lent to itself). Intragovernmental debt includes money for government trust funds, such as pension plans and the debt for social security. Overall, intragovernmental holdings account for over $3.79 trillion of the total debt at this time.

The remaining $5.04 trillion or so has been purchased by the public, including foreign entities. This largely comes from the issuance of U.S. Treasury securities. Nearly half ($2.4 trillion) is composed of Treasury notes (aka T-notes), while T-bills and T-bonds (including savings bonds) cover most of the remaining public portion of the debt. Bonds sold for infrastructure projects are also part of the national debt.

It is common for individual Americans and businesses to buy bonds and other securities, though much of the debt is now held overseas. At the end of 2006, foreign holdings of Treasury debt were $2.223 trillion, which was 44% of the total debt held by the public. Foreign central banks owned 64% of the Federal debt held by foreign residents; private investors owned nearly all the rest (figures are from the Analytical Perspectives of the 2006 U.S. Budget, page 257 and the U.S. Treasury website).

The country holding the most U.S. debt is Japan which held $612.3 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2007. The People's Republic of China holds the second most U.S. debt, ending the first quarter of 2007 with over $1.2 trillion in total foreign reserves, of which about $420.2 billion are U.S. Treasury securities.[5][6]

Chino Kapone
09-19-2007, 01:52 PM
we owe china a TON of money. the government borrows $500 billion more than the taxes collected every year.

abudabit
09-19-2007, 01:58 PM
Yep, the only country that owns more US debt than China is Japan.

Here's another interesting factoid: We have about a $890 billion deficit. The highest in the world, of course. Next highest? Spain, at less than 1/10th of that!

Fr. Dougal
09-19-2007, 02:22 PM
When was the last time the US wasn't in debt?

HummerTuesdays
09-19-2007, 02:40 PM
Ugh. If only the government would cut spending. Instead, they'll just raise our taxes. Again.

abudabit
09-19-2007, 02:42 PM
When was the last time the US wasn't in debt?

Not sure if I can directly post this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Public_debt_per_GDP_1791-2006.svg

Looks like pre WWI we weren't in a crazy amount of debt. WWII is what really got things going.

FMDoug
09-19-2007, 02:50 PM
Ugh. If only the government would cut spending. Instead, they'll just raise our taxes. Again.

It's really hard for a gov't to cut spending once they start it. Once it starts a program, the people rely on that program, and it makes it that much harder to get rid of it. It does happen, but it puts the gov't in a difficult spot. The only way this gov't is going to shape up is to own up to the public, explain why they have to cut programs and raise the taxes for the upper middle/upper class for a little while. Once everything is stable then they can lower the taxes again.

That is my opinion

HummerTuesdays
09-19-2007, 02:57 PM
Freezing spending would be a good start. Oh, and cutting out the pork, too. But god forbid our elected officials stop handing out favors to people that don't need them.

Treat_Yourself
09-19-2007, 03:20 PM
Freezing spending would be a good start. Oh, and cutting out the pork, too. But god forbid our elected officials stop handing out favors to people that don't need them.

Who would vote for these incompetent, corrupt morons if they didn't buy votes with porkbarrel legislation?

abudabit
09-19-2007, 03:29 PM
2005 Spending (in millions):

050 National Defense 423,098
150 International Affairs 29,569
250 General Science, Space and Technology 24,459
270 Energy 1,883
300 Natural Resources and Environment 30,286
350 Agriculture 22,353
370 Commerce and Housing Credit 8,092
400 Transportation 69,494
450 Community and Regional Development 12,949
500 Education, Training, Employment and Social Services 91,817
550 Health 248,780
570 Medicare 293,574
600 Income Security 342,324
650 Social Security 516,457
700 Veterans Benefits and Services 65,444
750 Administration of Justice 40,781
800 General Government 19,392
900 Net Interest 177,909

TheDrip
09-19-2007, 03:40 PM
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress on Wednesday that the federal government will hit the current debt ceiling on Oct. 1.

Republicans defend the tax cuts, saying the deficit is now on a downward trajectory in part because of the economic stimulus provided by the tax cuts.


um...ok

abudabit
09-19-2007, 03:44 PM
Republicans seem to have forgotten some time in the mid 90's that in order to do tax cuts you also have to do spending cuts.

TheDrip
09-19-2007, 03:44 PM
When was the last time the US wasn't in debt?

If I remember correctly from a US History class in college, it was in the mid 1830's, during the Jackson presidency.

Chino Kapone
09-19-2007, 03:49 PM
Tom Coburn, he is our only chance right now. Him and Obama, i will vote for Obama if he gets the nod.

"Bridge to Nowhere" ring a bell???? and all the personal spending our gov't does.


http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_5318
READ this article from GQ, its pretty long, but it made me love Coburn. He wants to cut spending and is doing his best.

MrBogey
09-19-2007, 03:57 PM
Republicans seem to have forgotten some time in the mid 90's that in order to do tax cuts you also have to do spending cuts.

The two are unrelated.

Your_Moms_Box
09-19-2007, 07:47 PM
The two are unrelated.

your a moron.... which is possibly unrelated to your post.


and they forgot when they embraced "reaganomics" aka a short term fix that amplifies the problem long term



I'm gonna go max out my credit cards, not pay them, and tell mastercard they just need to raise my limit

MAV
09-19-2007, 08:53 PM
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.
His name is Henry Paulson. His name is Henry Paulson.

abudabit
09-19-2007, 08:58 PM
You know what they say, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Huddla huddla.

datsyukian deek
09-19-2007, 09:03 PM
I blame Iran.

(Obsessively padding post count so I can get more e-respect)

Fruit Monkey
09-19-2007, 09:17 PM
http://learnchinese.elanguageschool.net/

guitargod2112
09-19-2007, 10:30 PM
2005 Spending (in millions):

050 National Defense 423,098
150 International Affairs 29,569
250 General Science, Space and Technology 24,459
270 Energy 1,883
300 Natural Resources and Environment 30,286
350 Agriculture 22,353
370 Commerce and Housing Credit 8,092
400 Transportation 69,494
450 Community and Regional Development 12,949
500 Education, Training, Employment and Social Services 91,817
550 Health 248,780
570 Medicare 293,574
600 Income Security 342,324
650 Social Security 516,457
700 Veterans Benefits and Services 65,444
750 Administration of Justice 40,781
800 General Government 19,392
900 Net Interest 177,909

As you can see, nothing costs more than war. And yet, we went to war for no good reason...hmmm. So that shit's gotta stop. Energy? Yeah, there's cheaper energy out there. We just need a leader to push us in the right direction. It's not going to be a fast change, but it can happen. International affairs? I wonder if that includes all the aid we give to other countries. We need to be very frugal doing that. Other areas: change to the Fair Tax, legalize marijuana and other "not so harmful" drugs (and tax the hell outta them), and cut some of the ridiculous programs like the FCC. :icon_mrgr Well, at least not make them so powerful. Lots of money goes to stupid programs we don't need. We have to let the American people be responsible adults. We've become a nation of pussies. I know Opie and Ant agree. If we do these things, we'll have a good start at building a better nation with a smaller deficit.

MrBogey
09-19-2007, 11:00 PM
your a moron.... which is possibly unrelated to your post.


and they forgot when they embraced "reaganomics" aka a short term fix that amplifies the problem long term



I'm gonna go max out my credit cards, not pay them, and tell mastercard they just need to raise my limit

We're not in a closed economic system. Cutting tax rates doesn't mean tax revenues have to fall.

Laffer is right. There is a sweet spot for economic development vs taxation and adjusting the tax rate towards that point is always a positive for the economy and tax collector.

Edit: Oh, and your analogy follows my point. Your credit debt isn't based on your income. It's based on spending.

UCFGavin
09-19-2007, 11:42 PM
you mean the things that Ron Paul has been preaching about? why should we bother listening to him when he only uses evidence and fact to appeal to logic?

Screwtape
09-20-2007, 12:22 PM
this makes me really confident that our nation could handle a universal health care system :)

datsyukian deek
09-20-2007, 05:05 PM
this makes me really confident that our nation could handle a universal health care system :)


Well if congress is gonna approve a never ending credit line of spending for the government, why not go all out and have free health care?

Plunkies
09-20-2007, 05:42 PM
Our retard president needs to make a call to Board Room Jimmy, he'd get this mess sorted out in a matter of minutes.

Treat_Yourself
09-20-2007, 06:05 PM
you mean the things that Ron Paul has been preaching about? why should we bother listening to him when he only uses evidence and fact to appeal to logic?

I'm planning to waste my vote on him. Haven't voted in a primary election in a while. I wish he could get the Republican nomination.

WaddleDoodle
09-20-2007, 09:10 PM
I'm thinking of switching from the Libertarian party to the Republican just so I can vote for Paul in the primaries. I'll switch back after that.

Your_Moms_Box
09-20-2007, 09:17 PM
Get him to the general election and i'll vote for him.

until then, I will take liberals over neoliberals any day.

UCFGavin
09-20-2007, 10:35 PM
I'm thinking of switching from the Libertarian party to the Republican just so I can vote for Paul in the primaries. I'll switch back after that.

thats what i'm doing :) felt a bit dirty to change, but it needed to be done.

UCFGavin
09-20-2007, 10:36 PM
I'm planning to waste my vote on him. Haven't voted in a primary election in a while. I wish he could get the Republican nomination.

dr. paul has been racking up wins in straw polls and has pulled within 3% of romney on a national scale in the latest gallup poll. not only that, but thats only polling former primary voters that are likely to vote in this primary. its not including people like myself who changed parties to vote. i'm thinking we're probably looking at a national support of around 7-8% which is around romney's level.