Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Spending out of control

January 14, 2013

Members of Congress who voted for tax increases approved Ja....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jan-14-13 12:20 PM

It was al a big ploy to keep the public from seeing what is really going on. Washington needs to be put on notice that they work for us. Every one of those 535 slackers is responsible for the deficit. Call your reps and sen.'s and ask if they could run thier household like they run the gov't. Stop spending more than we take in. Stop giving our money to those who really don't like us. Stop giving security to places that should be paying for it. If our foreign embassys need the protection of the US Marines, then shut them down and have no presence there.

With all that is going on now -- the founders would have been shooting a while ago.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 12:36 PM

Once again the LH gets it completely wrong. Try these facts:

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.

Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%.

There has been no huge increase in spending under the current president, despite what you hear.

11 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 1:08 PM

Dear Moderation. In 2009, the last year we had a budget, Obama approved 1.4 Trillion dollars of spending that were not in the Budget.

Now to be fair, there has never been a budget during the Obama Presidency.

I ask that you stop spreading these lies.

9 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 1:22 PM

Also even if in your wildest dream there were no increases in spending, (LOL) with the loss of revenue from the economic slowdown there should be DRASTIC cuts that are needed to get our heads above water. One last thing, the final year of Bushes term there was that matter of stimulus that Obama discussed with president Bush was doubled by Nancy Pelosi as the original figure was much too low for the liberally controlled houses of congress, yes BOTH houses. And as Laker88 will attest to it is CONGRESS that holds the purse strings... I hope that the republican held congress ties those strings together and then seals them shut. NO NEW SPENDING or TAXES it is time for CUTS!

5 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 1:36 PM

If we increase spending and put people to work building and maintaining our roads, bridges that are so in need of maintenance that would increase revenue. When people are working they pay taxes and they are not collecting welfare. The private sector is just letting the money that squirrled away as a result of the Bush tax cuts and they and they are not creating any jobs.And then you need to understaqnd that it is congress that appropriates the money to be spent and therefore it is their responsiblity to make sure the debt they allowed the country to incur gets paid.+ We can not cut spending and still pay our bills and the house and the senate need to wake up and run the country and stop filling the pockets of their political cronies.

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 1:42 PM

Unfortunately that "matter of stimulus" was needed to save the country from economic ruin...thanks to disasterous tax cuts while trying to pay for 2 wars. Also, many thanks to the gop right wingers for getting our credit rating lowered, which they were correctly admonished by their own party. Re the editorial, the largest 10 year tax increases fall mainly on the wealthy elite, and its still much less than before. And if the gop is "serious" about cutting expenditures, they should start with the defense budget!

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 1:52 PM

Let's stop pointing fingers, the dolts in Washington, on both sides were put there by the voters. Therefore the whole thing is our problem. Keep their phones ringing and keep asking if they run thier home in the same fashion. You can't spend what you don't have. We are broke, now let's do something about it.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:02 PM

Scarecrow57, can you do as moderation did and show the citation?

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:06 PM

“Late Friday evening, Deputy Director Zients confirmed that for the fourth time in five years, the president’s budget will not be submitted in compliance with the law,” the aide said. “Zients did not indicate how late the administration will delay its submission, simply noting ‘We will submit it to Congress as soon as possible,’ ” the aide said. Under the law, Obama must submit a budget by the first Monday in February, but he has met the deadline only once. The annual budget submission is supposed to start a congressional budgeting process, but that has also broken down. The Senate last passed a budget resolution in 2009.

4 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:34 PM

Moderation ... can you tell us where the stimulus for Obama and TARP is in those numbers? Just doesn't seem right. Not to criticize a government agency that they are fudging any numbers or anything!

I think we need to cut spending internationally and take care of our own. We need to reform internatinal welfare programs before saying US citizens don't deserve help. Just a thought!

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:34 PM

Scarecrow: Is your info from a government agency? Moderation cited his source, CBO, what is your's?

9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:40 PM

Letscutthebs: I agree, "I think we need to cut spending internationally and take care of our own." Are you referring to an early exit from Iraq, and Obamacare as an example of taking care of our own? Romney's $2 trillion increase in defense over 10 years is more than the projected cost of Obamacare over the next 10 years. So, I guess I'm with you.

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 2:41 PM

Since the start of fiscal year 2011, President Barack Obama has signed into law approximately $2.4 trillion of deficit reduction for the years 2013 through 2022. Nearly three-quarters of that deficit reduction is in the form of spending cuts, while the remaining one-quarter comes from revenue increases

10 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 3:07 PM

In his/her next commetn, TiredOfTax will accuse me of being 'moderation.'

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 3:15 PM

I'm for getting rid of free trade agreements and taxing international goods. Many countries already ax ours.

HT: Absolutely! I say we stop giving any aid to countries like North Korea. Stop sending relief to Pakistan for nothing in return. Get the H E double hockey sticks out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and their corrupt puppet governments. Oh there is areas to cut outside of our domestic budget and defense spending, but you'll be criticized as a racist or as inhumane in the light of evil. Give me the numbers someone. How much do we spend a year. I know you wanna. Spit me the facts and BS!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 3:44 PM

Letscutthebs, the US has 'provided virtually no aid to North Korea' since early 2009 (source: 'Foreign Assistance to North Korea', Congressional Research Service, 4/2012). And before that, 90% was in the form of food and energy. I don't think starving or freezing a people to death is very diplomatic at a time when we're trying to win them over.

Just saying. And if only to show you how important it is to cite actual fact, versus 'fact.'

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 4:20 PM

I agree in part. Most relief comes from the state department in which has a budget last year of $51.6. Not a large percentage is spent toward these countries but in our discussion every nickel counts. Hearts and minds doesn't work with as people who won't fight for themselves and surrender to tyranny. Just saying we could save a couple billion from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Look at the budget yourself ... you can google it ... i'm not writing a paper here.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 4:23 PM

*$51.6 billion*

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 4:28 PM

rschweizer- listen (or in this case -read) up here Skippy, there was a time in this great country when aid (other than immediate medical care of a prisoner) to any enemy was considered treason. Punishable by death.

moderation is obviously on your liberal side and more than likely a supporter of your pal Barry. Spending has to stop, the balance in the checking acct. is less than zero and now this Bozo is talking about raising the debt ceiling so we can borrow more.

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 4:36 PM

A bunch of years ago, I went into the bank to see a loan officer. I told him that the wife and I just took a vote and decided to raise our debt ceiling. I'd need about $5,000 and I could pick up the check tomorrow. I was politely informed that I must fill out an application, they must check my credit rating, and all the usual stuff. I reminded him that the gov't just decided to raise its debt limit and -bingo- just like that it was done. Who checked their credit????

right away I'm a smart a**

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 5:38 PM

drugsrus, treason is usually an applicable term for aiding an enemy by declaration of Congress. Proving treason by means of aiding a country with which we are not war with will be very, very difficult. We'll let you argue that case though.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 5:42 PM

drugsrus, actually there ARE private credit-rating agencies that monitor and grade issue the official creditworthiness of a government. And believe it or not, the US's still remains solid.

On 8/5/2011, the rating did drop, from outstanding' to 'excellent'.

You need to actually do your research.

Are you breaking in in hives from all these allergic reactions to facts today? Or are your allergies the throat-shrinking kind?

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 5:44 PM

It should further be noted that 'excellent' (AA+ rating) is still a tough feat to accomplish and a very, very good rating to have. And that was only one of the three agencies that reported that rating.

The other two agencies? They kept their ratings at a perfect AAA, basically like giving 5 out of 5 stars.

Someone get you the penicillin!

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 6:20 PM

There is a huge differences between budget cuts and projected deficit savings. In a budget cut you actually cut what you spend, in the deficit savings you simply cut the top off increased spending. We absolutely need budget cuts. Now Obamacare is spending increases as well as a mega tax increase. Obama and democrats SPEND.

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-14-13 6:23 PM

rschweizer, no moderation has some facts, just confused a bit, no where near your impossibilities.

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 41 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web