And It keeps Growing and Growing

The National Debt Stands at -

$11,604,364,019,085.60

As of July 21, 2009.

Based on the Average Interest Rate paid by the Federal Government of 3.456% as of June 30, 2009

The yearly interest alone in this debt is $401,046,820,499.60

Cato

But on the “bright side” of this, …… the Treasury Department is not using any of the newly printed $1.00 bills they printed up to fund TARP and Obama’s Surplus to pay the creditors the interest on those loans, notes and bonds.

The Treasury Department is using the “old” $1.00 bills for paying that interest.




.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Cato I thought this might be of interest since it brings into better perspective how and when this enormous debt was accumulated.

I notice you list the party of the President but you never mention which party controls Congress. For instance, you want to blame Reagan for debt but in his entire 8 years, the House of Representatives were controlled by Democrats and Tip O' Neil was the Speaker of the House.

Constitutionally speaking, ALL spending bills MUST originate in the House of Representatives. Ronald Reagan didn't sign one single bill that added one dollar to the deficit that didn't originate without the approval of Tip O’ Neil and Democrats.

Bush 1 faced the same task with Tom Foley as SOTH. And by the same token, when Clinton had a Democratic HOR with Foley as the speaker, he got little accomplished, especially along the lines of reducing the deficit. It wasn't until AFTER the contract with America and Republicans gaining control of the HOR with Newt Gingrich assuming the Speaker position that spending started coming in line and we started seeing a balanced budget.

And on the Senate side, which must approve all spending bills BEFORE they go to the President for his signature, none of the recent Republican Presidents have had a filibuster proof Senate. Democrats could have held up ANY spending bill at any time simply by refusing to vote for cloture.

You may very well want to blame Republicans for our deficits and yes, they are partially responsible. For instance, GWB added to it by not paying for Iraq and by signing the first stimulus and TARP bills. Had he paid for Iraq and not signed those two bills written by Nancy Pelosi, then he would have gone 8 years with a balanced budget EVERY year. But he didn't, so he to is a part of the $11 trillion dollar deficit this country now faces.

I guess the only argument would be which party is more responsible, Democrats who have originated the deficit spending for 30 plus years or Republican Presidents for signing those bills into law.

As you can't have one without the other, I would say they are both equally responsible, right up through January 2009. About the only thing I don't understand is why you feel the need to attempt to lay the blame solely on Republicans.

It’s about the one beef I have with you.

sodbuster wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Cato I thought this might be of interest since it brings into better perspective how and when this enormous debt was accumulated.

Sodbuster,

I made this graph myself. I'm well aware of how the debt came to be and who is responsible.





Take a good long look at it and you'll notice that neither party seems to have much fiscal responsibility. In other words, Democrats and republicans are alot alike.

Additionally, Aaron's post is right on the mark. It isn't just the president, it is congress also. It is congress (The House of Representatives) that originates spending bills. Botht he House and Senate have to approve a spending bill before it goes to the president. Of Course the president has the power to veto the bill. They are all Guilty.

Cato

I have my thoughts on how to address the problem. I'm curious, what would others do, especially sodbuster as his view comes from the left.

How stupid does Obama think we are? I've said for years that Boosh was a boob for leaving a huge debt. Unlike Obama, I don't flatter myself he left it to me. I think there's plenty to go around for several generations. Does he think we cannot see that he has quadrupled the public debt?

"Cato I thought this might be of interest since it brings into better perspective how and when this enormous debt was accumulated."

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Nothing in my comment mentions political party, particular office, etc.

Each person is free to read the info or not read it, and assign as much or as little credibility as they choose.

We all know where you're going with it sodbuster. Every person on this forum has seen you state on more then one occasion that Reagan and Bush are responsible for the highest increases to the deficit in history. Part of what is wrong with this country and a big reason we're in the whole we are is becasue of partisan politics so why not just be honest about it and lets have an open discussion?

I don't think I'm alone in saying that about the biggest beef I have with your views is your refusal to admit what they are and how partisan you really are.

"the biggest beef I have with your views is your refusal to admit what they are and how partisan you really are."

Well I am not sure where you are headed with this Aaron.

We disagree on so much I don't know what you want me to "admit" to.

For example, I have said more than once that there are times/circumstances that justify some measure of income redistribution.

i.e. Soc. Security, Aid to families with dependent children, etc.

And I also support a progressive income tax.

But more to the point of this thread, I disagree with the republican neocons on uncontrolled deficit spending.

Over the past 16 Congressional sessions, Democrats have controlled the House of Representatives, for 10 of those sessions while Republicans have had control for 6 sessions. Of those 6 sessions, the Republican led HOR submitted a balanced budget half the time.

On the Senate side, Republicans have fared a little better as they've had a majority in 8 of the sessions while Democrats have had control for 7 of the sessions with one split evenly. But one thing Republicans have never had but Democrats have had 3 times is a filibuster proof Senate so on any Senate bill, Democrats could have stopped the spending simply by refusing to vote for cloture.

The reason all of this is important is that all spending bills originate in the House of Representatives, have to pass Senate muster and then go to the President for his signature to authorize the spending.

Despite those FACTS and the fact that Democrats are responsible for as much deficit over the past 2 years as Republicans were in the previous 6, I find it a bit odd that you're blaming Republican non-cons for uncontrolled deficit spending.

And you wonder what I want you to admit. How about for starters, Democrats share at least as much of the blame for our national debt and “uncontrolled deficit spending” as Republican neo-cons.

"And you wonder what I want you to admit. How about for starters, Democrats share at least as much of the blame for our national debt and “uncontrolled deficit spending” as Republican neo-cons."

Sorry but based on the info above, I cannot say Dems are just as culpable.

Although their hands are not altogethor clean either.

What I think we need is a "revival" of the American Dream brought about by a national commitment to energy independence, and undertaking a major research project like a cure for cancer by 2015.

Meaningful and productive new union scale jobs that people can raise a family on.

Projects we can all get behind and be a a proud part of the American Dream.

Just be one big-az happy family all for one, one for all.

sodbuster wrote:"Cato I thought this might be of interest since it brings into better perspective how and when this enormous debt was accumulated."

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Nothing in my comment mentions political party, particular office, etc.

Each person is free to read the info or not read it, and assign as much or as little credibility as they choose.

sodbuster wrote:Sorry but based on the info above, I cannot say Dems are just as culpable.

Quite Frankly, it is of little concern to me what you or for that material what anyone else thinks. That facts speak for themselves. You can choose to believe the facts or you can choose not to. It's your choice, but that doesn't change the facts.

This isn't about partys or party affiliation. It is about people who have spent the nation into poverty. It is about people who have been elected to office and have sworn an oath to uphold, defend, and protect the US Constitution and have then did done everything but what they swore to do.

The very first thing that each and every liberty loving American has to do is come to grips with the basic and simple fact is that the corruption, the malfeasance of office, the use of political office for personal gain, and the total disregard for the original intent of the US Constitution transends party lines.

I agree with George Washington when he stated that government wasn't an elequence, it was like fire, a dreadful servent and a terrible master. The most basic and most important principle of this nation was that each of us were responsbile for ourselves. The only real need of government is to protect and defend liberty. The real blessing of liberty comes with very limited government. Both parties have long since abandoned this one very basic principle.

sodbuster wrote:"And you wonder what I want you to admit. How about for starters, Democrats share at least as much of the blame for our national debt and “uncontrolled deficit spending” as Republican neo-cons."

Sorry but based on the info above, I cannot say Dems are just as culpable.

Although their hands are not altogethor clean either.

What I think we need is a "revival" of the American Dream brought about by a national commitment to energy independence, and undertaking a major research project like a cure for cancer by 2015.

Meaningful and productive new union scale jobs that people can raise a family on.

Projects we can all get behind and be a a proud part of the American Dream.

Just be one big-az happy family all for one, one for all.

If you don't find both parties just as culpable, then you don't understand how our government works.

"Quite Frankly, it is of little concern to me what you or for that material what anyone else thinks."<----- Cato

Well I had about figured that out Cato...

I suppose we are all guilty of that attitude to some extent.

Yes we are all guilty of that attitude of that attidude from time to time sodbuster.

But that doesn't change the fact that Cato is correct in his statement of the facts speaking for themselves.

The only way they are not clear is if you're looking through rose colored glasses or as you put it, loving eyes never see.

You say Democrats aren't as culpubably as Republicans in the deficit spending. Perhaps you can explain to me how Democrats are not just as culpable considering the facts that have been laid out here?

I'll start with Reagan. How did he run up the debt without the aid of Democrats when it was Democrats who controlled the House of Representatives for all 8 years of his Presidency.

sodbuster wrote:"Quite Frankly, it is of little concern to me what you or for that material what anyone else thinks."<----- Cato

Well I had about figured that out Cato...

I suppose we are all guilty of that attitude to some extent.

OK, then, I would really like to hear your explaination as to how one party is not as guilty as the other. So, could you explain that to me please.

Well I appreciate your guys' attitude today but I cant seem to keep my thoughts organized.

I am changing meds around so you guys go ahead and I will re-join later ok.

What going on. Cato and I agree that both parties are pretty much equally culpable and I think I've laid out a pretty clear case as to why. I'm just interested in how you, or anyone on the left for that matter would refute it.

I'm also curious as to how you say you deplore deficit spending yet you support Barrack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid AND the DEMOCRATIC stimulus package which received 3 Republican votes. And one of those Republicans is now a Democrat and the state the other two represent is receiving a disproportionate amount of stimulus dollars.

Perhaps when you get straightened out, we can have a discussion. Until then, I hope you feel better.

An Interesting observation -

Sodbuster has posted on other threads since he bowed out of this conversation for medical reasons.

Just an obeservation

Cato

I think Sherman/sodbuster is a heck of a nice guy with very well meaning intentions. As I told him, the only problem I have with him is is inability to adequately defend or explain his positions, which prevents an honest, open discussion.

I had conversations with Robo and even though he hated me, I learned a lot from him and even changed my views on a few items.

When Stephanie and I started chatting, I don't know that she hated me but she certainly didn't like many of my views. I listened to her, read her post, did some research on my own, and now we agree on a lot of items and I call her a friend.

Even Ziggy, despite his unwillingness to admit he's a Marxist, I can have a decent conversation with for a while even though I know he's going to resort to weaslewording once I prove him wrong.

It would be really nice to have an open, honest discussion about our fundamental differences and to see everyone contribute.

Our founding fathers managed to do it with a much larger monkey on thier back then we could ever imagine and they did it well enough to come up with a document that has done a pretty good job of governing for over 200 years. The problems don't start until we stray from that document.

Oh well, I guess I can dream.

Aaron wrote:I think Sherman/sodbuster is a heck of a nice guy with very well meaning intentions. As I told him, the only problem I have with him is is inability to adequately defend or explain his positions, which prevents an honest, open discussion.

I had conversations with Robo and even though he hated me, I learned a lot from him and even changed my views on a few items.

When Stephanie and I started chatting, I don't know that she hated me but she certainly didn't like many of my views. I listened to her, read her post, did some research on my own, and now we agree on a lot of items and I call her a friend.

Even Ziggy, despite his unwillingness to admit he's a Marxist, I can have a decent conversation with for a while even though I know he's going to resort to weaslewording once I prove him wrong.

It would be really nice to have an open, honest discussion about our fundamental differences and to see everyone contribute.

Our founding fathers managed to do it with a much larger monkey on thier back then we could ever imagine and they did it well enough to come up with a document that has done a pretty good job of governing for over 200 years. The problems don't start until we stray from that document.

Oh well, I guess I can dream.

Like you I owuld like to have an honest discussion about our differences. I have learned alot in our discussions and even changed my mind a few times.

"Like you I would like to have an honest discussion about our differences. I have learned alot in our discussions and even changed my mind a few times."<---- Cato.

Well I am taking my granddaughter to the Cincinnati zoo.

I will be thinking good thoughts about all.

Hopefully back around 10