President Obama Says Deficit Spending "Unsustainable"

[ImWithStupid]

 

Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable?

 

By Roger Runningen and Hans Nichols

 

May 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending ?unsustainable,? warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.

 

?We can?t keep on just borrowing from China,? Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. ?We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children?s future with more and more debt.?

 

Holders of U.S. debt will eventually ?get tired? of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. ?It will have a dampening effect on our economy.?

Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable? (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

 

 

OK. First President Obama stood on a stage next to Tim Geithner, and railed about how they were going to go after those who don't pay taxes on money earned over seas (just like Geithner did himself), and now he preaches against "unsustainable" deficit spending after he himself just spent more borrowed money than any other person in history, and did both with a straight face.

 

I wouldn't want to play poker with that man.

[hugo]

Another government created crisis which Obama will find the solution is more government.

[RoyalOrleans]

Obama is quite taken with himself.

 

Yet, his hypocrisy knows no bounds nor is he chastised by the mainstream media.

 

Imagine if this were John McCain, or any member of the GOP, and then imagine the media coverage.

[ImWithStupid]

Take this quote from the President...

 

?We can?t keep on just borrowing from China,? Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. ?We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children?s future with more and more debt.?

 

 

This is the exact, exact same thing that has been said by conservatives for months and despite what the media wanted the sheeple to think, was the basis of the tea parties, not anti-Obama, racism or pro-rich.

 

It was aimed at the spending by Obama, the previous administration and Congress. The people at the tea parties were well aware that the people who still believed that Obama was only going to tax the rich, were only fooling themselves and the amount of spending going on would harm everyone, including generations to come.

 

When it was said by conservatives it was a bunch of crap, but now that the Messiah said it, it's newsworthy and prophetic, somehow.

[ImWithStupid]

I also like this part of the article...

 

Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion increase in other spending.

 

Not only is this a miniscule amount in comparison to the $3.6 Trillion budget, but of that $17 Billion dollars that is proposed to be cut, half a billion dollars are from programs that were just signed into existance, supposedly needed programs, in the omnibus spending bill and the stimulus bill.

 

So in February these programs were necessary, and had to stay in the spending bills, but now they are unnecessary or failed programs that can be cut.

 

Something doesn't seem quite right here.

[eddo]

Not only is this a miniscule amount in comparison to the $3.6 Trillion budget, but of that $17 Billion dollars that is proposed to be cut, half a billion dollars are from programs that were just signed into existance, supposedly needed programs, in the omnibus spending bill and the stimulus bill.

 

So in February these programs were necessary, and had to stay in the spending bills, but now they are unnecessary or failed programs that can be cut.

 

Something doesn't seem quite right here.

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt8hTayupE]YouTube - Obama Budget Cuts Visualization[/ame]

[RoyalOrleans]

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class.

 

That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

 

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

 

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.

 

The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

 

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

 

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

 

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

 

The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

 

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

 

Could not be any simpler than that!

 

$3,400,000,000,000.00

[ImWithStupid]

That's because college students are stupid and idealistic...

 

 

The other side: Students fail to see similarity between the redistribution of wealth and grades

5/5/2009

 

 

Ashley Herzog

 

If you're baffled by college students' enthusiastic support for Soviet-lite economic policies, you need to watch several short videos created by members of Young America's Foundation (YAF).

 

In the videos, YAF members approach their classmates with a petition calling for the redistribution of student GPAs. "It would make it so that all students have an equal opportunity to go to grad school," University of Oregon YAFer Kenny Crabtree explains. Students with bad grades would therefore be entitled to points earned by straight-A students.

 

Their classmates are flabbergasted.

 

"Is that, like, a joke or something?" one guy responds.

 

"Why would you take points from people who are higher up and give them to people who didn't meet the requirements?" another asks George Mason University YAFers. But when asked if he supports Obama's wealth redistribution schemes, he says "yes."

 

Shocking? Not really. As I pointed out in my March 30 column, most college students are economically illiterate. When quizzed by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute about basic concepts, such as supply and demand, the average college senior's score was 53 percent. And since most don't work or pay taxes (only 46 percent of full-time students have jobs), they simply have no idea how capitalism works.

 

But they do understand grades. Students who study hard get good grades; students who skip class and binge drink every night get bad grades. Some struggle with difficult material, but with enough effort (attending office hours, seeing a tutor) most can maintain a decent GPA. Every sane college student realizes the immorality of "spreading the grades around" - regardless of who benefits.

 

And it makes their rationales for supporting socialism interesting.

 

"I don't think people who worked for their grades should have to suffer because someone else slacked off," one student says. Then how can she believe in wealth redistribution? "Money is different." Another explains, "Earning money is not the same as earning grades." O-kay.

 

Again, this is typical. Day in and day out, professors indoctrinate students with hatred for the greedy "rich" - which, under our tax code, includes a lot of middle-class families just like theirs who struggle to pay the mortgage and college tuition. They're taught to believe that people who don't work are entitled to endless welfare benefits financed by the productive class. But when it comes to redistributing grades they earned, they don't support it.

 

There is some hope for the future. As several of my fellow libertarian columnists have pointed out, most people who support Obama's plan to "spread the wealth around" either don't pay income taxes or are too rich to care. (And some of Obama's biggest supporters, including Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, are living off inherited money earned by somebody else.) As soon as these students become productive business owners and professionals, they won't want the Democrats confiscating money they worked for.

 

"It's amazing how students only care about the immorality of socialism when it hurts them," said George Mason University student Alyssa Cordova. Her classmates were universally opposed to a GPA redistribution plan.

 

Now, if we could just convince Ted Kennedy and John Kerry that we need to implement a "mansion redistribution plan" or "private jet redistribution plan," we could abolish Obama-style socialism altogether.

http://thepost.ohiou.edu/Main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=6&ArticleID=28195

[snafu]

 

LMAO! Okay even a moron like me can understand that. What's wrong with the other half of America.

[phreakwars]

Look at that... even more whining about the deficit (that Bush, the guy you elected twice, created), but not one of you have an answer for it.

 

I'm still in bliss at knowing the GOP doesn't stand a chance in 2012 either.

 

Still screaming socialism, still screaming TAX CUTS, still crying about him even being elected.

 

Ahh, life is good.

.

.

[ImWithStupid]

Look at that... even more whining about the deficit (that Bush, the guy you elected twice, created), but not one of you have an answer for it.

 

I'm still in bliss at knowing the GOP doesn't stand a chance in 2012 either.

 

Still screaming socialism, still screaming TAX CUTS, still crying about him even being elected.

 

Ahh, life is good.

.

.

 

 

Why do you hate your children?

 

You must be talking about the deficit that Bush spent 8 years amassing that President Obama was able to double in 100 days.

 

That's alright you still think that it's only the rich that are going to pay for this.

[phreakwars]

Well, I'll tell you like it is..

 

Every dollar... ever euro, every yen, every bit of currency you can think of... is all FAKE... It doesn't exist.

 

It's the way it has always been.

 

I don't worry about crap like that because if it all came crashing down tomorrow, it would mean absolutely NOTHING.

 

This perpetual debt myth is just something to keep the masses productive.

 

I don't care if our debt is $1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

 

If we default on all our debt, the world will simply have to reset it's way of thinking when it comes to goods and services trade.

.

.

[phreakwars]

Did you realize that 90%, yes 90% or even HIGHER of our total debt is ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS. Now that's crazy!!

 

What that means, is every dollar traded in the markets has been traded off again and again and again in foreign exchanges against other currencys.

 

We might as well all be paying for stuff with monopoly money, it holds the same value as the dollar or yen.

 

Here's how the big monopoly game works... lets say we each have $1,000... I'll loan you $100 of my money at interest, then I'm gonna turn around and get a loan from you to cover my hundred dollars and I'm gonna promise to pay that back to YOU with interest, then you from me and so on and so on until we each are in debted to each other by interest alone..... no problem, what we'll do then, since we are now out of paper monopoly money, is switch to our big calculator and keep lending each other money back and forth at interest as we keep exchanging railroads and hotels and what have you... the way we will figure what we owe each other is by keeping track of it electronically, or I.E. the calculator. Since we are no longer tied down by paper alone, we can each keep increasing our own credit lines to each other and deal in virtual money for however long we want, it doesn't mean a thing.

 

What's REALLY important here, is which of us is having someone bring us sandwhiches to keep the game going forever.... in other words... which of us is actually producing something to sustain us. We can deal with spliting the sandwich easily by adding it into our perpetual debt mix of virtual money as were trading railroads and houses and what have you..

 

So then, what happens if one of us says... OK, enough of this, give me all that you owe me, I've let you borrow WAYYY too much and I need to go home...

 

My answer would be.... well, here's your fake hundred dollars, now give me something for the sandwich and lets go home.

 

You'll in turn go, hey wait, I have no food at my place, can't I just stick around and trade some more? I'll give ya the fake hundred back for another sandwich...

 

And I'll say... "OF COURSE YOU WILL, NOW STFU AND ROLL THE NEXT TURN"

 

And THAT, is why I don't worry about this HUGE HUGE deficit that Obama has allegedly created.

.

.

[ImWithStupid]

That's not entirely true. Yes there isn't a tangible, set item backing currency. Not since the early 1970's when we went off of the gold standard.

 

Now, what backs our currency, ultimately is property and more so, producivity. Labor. If called in all at once, you, me, everyone owes foreign nations our labor. We will have to work for them.

[phreakwars]

1970's? More like 1930's when the government pulled off the biggest robbery ever.

 

As for us working for others... what a complete crock.... will never happen.... why..

 

Because the ones we owe, ain't in no better shape then we are.

 

Sure they can shift around property ownership papers and what have you, but what the hell are like say the chinese gonna do.... send over a huge ship with thousands of people and claim some American homes & businesses?

 

It's not profitable for them to do so, even if they did own it.... they still would have to transport the crap back to their own land.

 

So the only thing they can do, is take that stupid piece of paper that says so and so owe them such and such and either wipe their ass with it or sell it at a outrageously low price and loss and buy something else.

 

Were not fukking slaves to ANYBODY and we never will be.

.

.

[ImWithStupid]

Not true. Look at Zimbabwe and Germany of the 1920's. When you're paying a trillion dollars for a pound of bread, it'll be appearant what this spending can do. We just had a touch of inflation in the late 1970's. Wait until we get hit with the hyperinflation backlash of all the current printing and spending of a fiat currency.

[ImWithStupid]

1970's? More like 1930's when the government pulled off the biggest robbery ever.

 

 

.

.

 

 

Yea. Social Security. Then in the 1960's, Medicare. Next up to rob everyone, government run, single payer, health care.

[phreakwars]

Actually, I was talking about when they stole all of the gold reserves and changed our currency to imaginary money.

 

And we won't get a hyper inflation, again, for the same reason I said before, the guys we are in debt to are not in any better shape.

 

Zimbabwe.... has NOTHING to sell, Germany's money problems were caused by conservative capitalists and ironically cured by Hitler.

 

And yes, I know, I know, you'll say... but Germany's economy CRASHED under Hitler.... yes... POST WAR.

 

Kinda like America. Post Operation Iraqi Freedom.

.

.

[ImWithStupid]

Actually, I was talking about when they stole all of the gold reserves and changed our currency to imaginary money.

 

And we won't get a hyper inflation, again, for the same reason I said before, the guys we are in debt to are not in any better shape.

 

Zimbabwe.... has NOTHING to sell, Germany's money problems were caused by conservative capitalists and ironically cured by Hitler.

 

And yes, I know, I know, you'll say... but Germany's economy CRASHED under Hitler.... yes... POST WAR.

 

Kinda like America. Post Operation Iraqi Freedom.

.

.

 

Actually the Weimar Republic of early 1930's Germany was a progressive, print and spend government, like we have now. Not a conservative government.

 

Germany's economy didn't crash post war for any other reason then he was spending his way out of a bad economy (and as we already told you, fascism is like socialism, but less direct ownership, but government control of the financial sector, manufacturing sector, energy, etc... You know like the Obama administration). Didn't work then, never worked in the past, but I guess we might as well try.

 

That's why we'll be in the same shape as Zimbabwe. Not only are we printing money out of thin air, but we are a country with a huge trade deficit. We're in a negative on things to sell too.

 

We didn't drop gold completely to back currency until 1971. It was done to fund the Vietnam War.

[phreakwars]

Man, if that were only accurate... the greedy capitalist GOP could be the new Jews who need to be holocausted out for the better of all mankind.

.

.

[ImWithStupid]

[attach=full]2322[/attach]

[hugo]

The dollar is like a share of stock. Its' value depends on how well its' managers manage assets and debt.