Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where did all the money go?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 01:42 AM
Original message
Where did all the money go?
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 02:15 AM by stickdog
This is a post for any fiscally responsible fence sitters you might know. The links are picked specifically to be unassailable by even the most brainwashed Faux News zealot.

From: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa543.pdf

President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. ... Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush's first term. The federal budget as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton's last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush's first term.

Please note the charts on pages 1-7 of the above linked pdf document.


*****


Concerning our much ballyhooed finally increasing federal revenues:

http://www.crfb.org/html/documents/ReleaseMSRJuly2005.p...

While higher revenues are indeed good news, the recent revenue surge only begins to restore the decline in revenues over the last several years. Total revenues last year were $145 billion lower in nominal terms than they were in 2000. Even if the trend of unexpectedly high revenues continues throughout this year, total revenues will almost certainly fall below the 2000 revenue levels adjusted for inflation.

Please note the chart on page 2 of the above linked pdf document.


*****


From: http://www.crfb.org/html/documents/ReleaseMSRJuly2005.p...

Annual non-military and non-homeland security spending increased $303 Billion between Fiscal Year 2001 and Fiscal Year 2005. The acknowledged Federal Debt has increased over $2 Trillion since Fiscal Year 2000 and now stands at $7.9 Trillion.


*****


Our Republican controlled federal government has been spending borrowed money like a drunken sailor on shore leave at the exact time in our overall demographic "lifespan" when our government should be most concerned with saving. Baby boomers are now at the height of their earning power as well as their ability to refinance real estate holdings because interest rates have been held artificially low for years. This has allowed the US population to temporarily fund consumption levels that are almost certainly unsustainable, despite lower real wages and salaries and a moribund job market. However, these boomers are approaching retirement age (even if it gets raised to 68 or 70) very rapidly. In addition, the Republicans' pharmapork prescription drug plan has committed our federal government to hundreds and hundreds of billions more in wasteful corporate welfare.

So after a truly historic orgy of tax cuts, corporate giveaways and rampant overall federal spending increases unseen since the days of LBJ's Great Society, exactly what do we as US citizens have to show for our 8 trillion dollar federal debt? Real wages and salaries are down. Past due credit card debt just hit a record high along with gas prices, and consumer confidence just suffered its biggest drop in 15 years. Job growth remains stagnant (to put it kindly), and the jobs that are being created are far less attractive than the well-paying white collar, information technology and manufacturing jobs that corporations are rushing to outsource to Asia by the million.

After spending over $200 billion in Iraq, we have somehow managed to reduce the number of Iraqi battalions capable of combat without U.S. support from three to one ( http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB60MB97EE.html ). How's that for money well spent? And with well over $100 billion already showered on the Department of Homeland Security, we can't even keep US citizens from dying of thirst by the hundreds in the aftermath of a natural disaster so predictable that the entire scenario was run as a mock FEMA exercise in July 2004 ( http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=13051 ). How secure does that make you feel?


*****








">



Of course, even though it's definitely NOT the American public, I suppose that someone has to be benefiting from all of Bush's reckless spending. Guess who?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. Excellent...thank you and nominated. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. Nicely done !!!!
Very informative and appreciated..Thanks ..

This bud's for you.. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I_Make_Mistakes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Dubya's Legacy, he bankrupts all that are under his power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nonconformist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:50 AM
Response to Original message
4. Recommended and bookmarked.
Wonderful resource! Great job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. ditto . . . and thanks . . . n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. bush inc has been thieving the countyr blind for years
that's why it make me so sick to hear conservatives wax on about how "awful" it was that some hurricane victims were looting diapers, food, or even the occasional TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dickthegrouch Donating Member (838 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
8. Excellent
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 02:31 PM by dickthegrouch
I like the payroll employment graph, but it's missing an important corollary: I think that a chart of the number of people at various wage levels would show a substantial shift downwards which continues to get worse.

What I want to see is a chart showing how many people earn 0-$10, $10-$20, $20-30 per hour etc. (It would only make sense if was also broken down by metro region as expenses also vary).

Then show a chart of what it takes in various regions to be able to make ends meet - it was big news here in SF this week that a family of four would need an annual income of more than $71000 to be able to afford all the necessities of life. Link to SFChronicle article

Needless to say (?), there are not many left who are earning this kind of money.

Even Arnold still thinks that the state has a spending problem rather than an income problem, but this payroll graph shows, quite clearly, that we also have an income problem.


(Corrected the $71000 figure on edit)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I looked around for that kind of data presentation, but's it
seems to be awfully hard to find.

I can't help but wonder why, but I have a feeling that it would paint an even uglier picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-01-05 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
10. Take a look at the fifth graph
The growth in spending.

The mandatory spending seems to be eating up the budget. That's social security, medicare, medicaid.

Any suggestions on what can be done about that?

Do you think national health insurance would reduce those costs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
11. Last self-aggrandizement.
Edited on Mon Oct-03-05 12:01 PM by stickdog
Straight to the archives for you, fiscal responsibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 23rd 2014, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC