Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (40887)	2/3/2010 8:47:13 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Editorial: Debt a threat, too Posted on Wed, Feb. 3, 2010 President Obama is in a tight spot. Economists tell him spending is necessary to grow the economy, but that just deepens already huge deficits that also threaten the country's future. So, what to do? Obama's new budget tells the tale. His proposed $3.8 trillion in spending puts the nation on course for deficits totaling more than $5 trillion over the next five years. That's staggering. Recession or not, the country can't afford that level of spending. The federal government now borrows one-third of all the money it spends. No household could survive very long like that. On this pace, interest payments on the national debt alone will reach $840 billion in 2020. That sum is more than the government is projected to spend in the same year on all discretionary domestic programs not related to security. The president is correct in pointing out that he faced enormous deficits when he walked in the door. Republican lawmakers now aghast at these deficits were largely silent while they were running up the red ink themselves. But Obama's short-term answer to fixing the economy is to borrow more money, and that increases deficits. As the national debt soars, it threatens economic recovery, putting pressure on interest rates to rise and tamping down job creation. Regardless of what came before him, this complicated job is now Obama's. The president and Congress need to do more to hold down spending, by taking a closer look at every department. The administration has pledged to freeze some domestic spending, and that's a start, but even within that spending cap, some programs are slated for increases much greater than the rate of inflation. Education spending would grow by 7.5 percent; the Energy Department's budget would grow 6.8 percent. And then there's the cost of fighting two wars, a burden that shows no sign of diminishing. The financial price tag is now at about $160 billion per year, only slightly less than it was at the height of the Bush administration. There's little indication yet that these costs can be reduced as much as Obama is projecting. Obama says he won't cut military funding while troops are in the field. But this enormous cost should be prompting more debate about what is truly best for our national security. A poor nation is a vulnerable nation. There's always a risk in raising taxes in a weak economy, even for those who can most afford it. But balancing the federal budget cannot be done responsibly through spending reductions alone. Bush-era tax cuts for couples earning more than $250,000 per year would expire on Dec. 31. Some families will end up paying more, but it's hard to see how that can be avoided. Just as necessary is for the administration to go back into its budget and make some hard choices on further cuts. It also needs to stop relying on some overly optimistic assumptions. For example, the budget counts on saving nearly $300 billion over 10 years by limiting income-tax deductions for wealthy taxpayers. That proposal went nowhere in Congress last year. Obama is trying to push the worst budget decisions further down the road. That won't do. philly.com

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (40887)	2/9/2010 12:35:11 AM
From: RMF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

I despise the deficits and I can't defend a lot of the stuff they're throwin' money away on, but I STILL think ALL the groundwork for this mess was established by the Republicans. These long term deficits that are being predicted won't stand....because they CAN'T. The rest of the world can't afford to keep buying our paper and eventually we'd have to raise rates so high that we'd sink into the abyss. What gets me is that a lot of people (you maybe) seem to be OVERJOYED that the country is in this mess. When Bush was screwing up...it DIDN'T make me feel "good", it scared me.