Wow this is heavy

[sharkcity]

You won't hear this on the nightly news. It sounds like what is really going on.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=3&article_id=98915

Obama should end the trillion dollar a year foreign policy, the 400 billion dollar a year war on drugs and the 400 billion a year income tax which will save another 300 billion a year in compliance cost.

States could get rid of DMV. In British Columbia you get your Plates, Registration, and Insurance at your insurance agent. This would save us all time stress and money

 

[Zippyjuan]

We do not spend a trillion dollars a year on foreign policy. Not even if you include every dollar spent by the Department of Defense and State Department.
The budget for the entire government in 2008 was just under $3 trillion. We did not spend a third of that overseas. Nor does the war on drugs consume $400 billion. By your numbers, that would be half the entire budget for just those two items. But you are correct that the US has been spending too much money it does not have. Hard to believe the budget was in balance only eight years ago. Our debt has nearly doubled (grown by $5 trillion) in that time.

Mandatory spending: $1.788 trillion (+4.2%)
$608 billion (+4.5%) - Social Security
$386 billion (+5.2%) - Medicare
$209 billion (+5.6%) - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion (+1.8%) - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion (+9.2%) - Interest on National Debt
Discretionary spending: $1.114 trillion (+3.1%)
$481.4 billion (+12.1%) - Department of Defense
$145.2 billion (+45.8%) - Global War on Terror
$69.3 billion (+0.3%) - Department of Health and Human Services
$56.0 billion (+0.0%) - Department of Education
$39.4 billion (+18.7%) - Department of Veterans Affairs
$35.2 billion (+1.4%) - Department of Housing and Urban Development
$35.0 billion (+22.0%) - Department of State and Other International Programs
$34.3 billion (+7.2%) - Department of Homeland Security
$24.3 billion (+6.6%) - Department of Energy
$20.2 billion (+4.1%) - Department of Justice
$20.2 billion (+3.1%) - Department of Agriculture
$17.3 billion (+6.8%) - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$12.1 billion (+13.1%) - Department of Transportation
$12.1 billion (+6.1%) - Department of the Treasury
$10.6 billion (+2.9%) - Department of the Interior
$10.6 billion (-9.4%) - Department of Labor
$51.8 billion (+9.7%) - Other On-budget Discretionary Spending
$39.0 billion - Other Off-budget Discretionary Spending
The Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan are not part included in the regular budget. Instead they are funded through special appropriations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008

 

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Zippyjuan,

This has probably been covered before but from where does Congressman Paul draw his, "trillion dollar foreign policy" figure? I suppose he is mistaken...

Thanks for the info.

Sincerely,
Omphfullas Zamboni

 

[Zippyjuan]

Ron likes that nice round "trillion dollar" figure. Even if it is not accurate. Some people exaggerate to make a point.

 

[silverlinkx2]

We do not spend a trillion dollars a year on foreign policy. Not even if you include every dollar spent by the Department of Defense and State Department.
The budget for the entire government in 2008 was just under $3 trillion. We did not spend a third of that overseas. Nor does the war on drugs consume $400 billion. By your numbers, that would be half the entire budget for just those two items. But you are correct that the US has been spending too much money it does not have. Hard to believe the budget was in balance only eight years ago. Our debt has nearly doubled (grown by $5 trillion) in that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008

I've heard that balanced budget statement is quite misleading. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Clinton left neither a surplus nor a balanced budget, he paid some obligations by borrowing against others. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong however.

 

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Hi again,

How exaggerated is it? The actual number is closest to 700 billion, yes?

Thank you for your time.

Regards,
Omphfullas Zamboni

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Ron Paul has said many times that he could defend the trillion dollar figure as what we spend on foreign policy.

And the person who question the Clinton surplus is correct.. There was no surplus. There was a deficit every year.

 

[tmosley]

We do not spend a trillion dollars a year on foreign policy. Not even if you include every dollar spent by the Department of Defense and State Department.
The budget for the entire government in 2008 was just under $3 trillion. We did not spend a third of that overseas. Nor does the war on drugs consume $400 billion. By your numbers, that would be half the entire budget for just those two items. But you are correct that the US has been spending too much money it does not have. Hard to believe the budget was in balance only eight years ago. Our debt has nearly doubled (grown by $5 trillion) in that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008

The last line of your quote talks about the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, and does not include them. Add those on there, and you'll probably exceed 1 trillion by quite a bit.

 

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

remember, there are costs for the "War on Terror" that do not appear in the budget. Do the bailouts appear in the budget? I do not think Ron was exaggerating.


*I sure as hell would not trust Wikipedia or even the White House with truly accurate figures.

 

[ShannonOBrien]

At the bottom of that wikipedia page it says that the Iraq and Afghanistan war are not included. So maybe he is taking the defense and war on terror spending and adding it to some estimates of what we spend on Iraq and Afghanistan.

In The Creature from Jekyll Island it says that the national debt is directly tied into how much money is in circulation because we have a fiat money system. If we paid off the national debt there would be $0 in circulation. But I actually think it's good for us to encourage this because as less and less money was in circulation we would have the opportunity to make a case for doing away with the fiat money system and reinstating a gold standard.

 

[roho76]

In The Creature from Jekyll Island it says that the national debt is directly tied into how much money is in circulation because we have a fiat money system. If we paid off the national debt there would be $0 in circulation. But I actually think it's good for us to encourage this because as less and less money was in circulation we would have the opportunity to make a case for doing away with the fiat money system and reinstating a gold standard.

Please elaborate. I have been meaning to read this book but haven't gotten around to it.

 

[CUnknown]

I think to get the trillion dollar number, you have to include interest payments on the national debt that accrued to finance previous overseas wars. And I think they should be included, because that is part of the cost of war.

 

[Bruno]

Please elaborate. I have been meaning to read this book but haven't gotten around to it.

You won't regret ordering it. Its a page-turner, and paints a whole new light on history and every war we have ever been in.

Recently, it was discovered that hundreds of millions of rounds where found aboard the Luisitania, which was used by the U.S. to smuggle to the British, known by the Germans. Its covered in the book in detail.

 

[ShannonOBrien]

Please elaborate. I have been meaning to read this book but haven't gotten around to it.

I will have to my husband to respond. He understands it much better than I do.

 

[Malakai]

He has explained that trillion dollar figure before. I don't remember where but I have definitely heard it.
And RP is not the first or only person to put out that number either. MSM commentators frequently say "if we can spend a trillion a year overseas why not another at home for social programs".

As for the debt dollar thing, new money is introduced into the economy when the fed FOMC buys tbills off the market (well, other securities too now). These literally represent government debt, when gov goes over budget, they must auction tbills to raise the funds to pay the deficit. Politicians don't just get to tell companies/states/offices "sorry there is no money just do it for us", it has to come from somewhere; and the politicians dont have the printing press the fed does.
Not all tbills are bought by the fed, but they must buy enough to keep demand and interest rates where they want them. And, very relavent to today, the more tbills we issue and the less people purchase them, the more the fed must purchase.
We are not going to be the only country having trouble selling our debt this year, but we have the most... by far. Hard to argue with the austrian inflation theorists like Paul and Schiff in the face of current events!

Well money is also created by fractional reserve banking but you get the idea. In both cases, fed and fractional reserve banking, calling in debt reduces the money supply. So in theory yes if every bank called in all debt, and the deficit was completely paid off, that would be all the money. But I dont know that for sure =)

 

[smithtg]

Mandatory spending: $1.788 trillion (+4.2%)
$608 billion (+4.5%) - Social Security
$386 billion (+5.2%) - Medicare
$209 billion (+5.6%) - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion (+1.8%) - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion (+9.2%) - Interest on National Debt


Social Security is hardly mandatory. As I put in a post before, and many agreed, its a ponzi scheme. When the funds (income) to pay the benefactors runs out, the expenses will go down (lol) beacause there is not trust fund. Of the few things I agreed with "W" about was getting the gov't out of social security and giving us our 6.25% back. Its only a matter of time before politics really gets in the way and the government finds "better" things to do with the income from the SS tax and to me "better" will definitely not deem "mandatory". I think some Gov't worker/politician likes to label stuff as "mandatory" so as to make a cloud over it likes its sacred to the sheeple. Anyone with half a brain knows we don't need much of this 'mandatory' spending.

#2 and #3 have big pharma written all over them. Government run insurance is keeping alot of government workers employed thats for sure

 

[angelatc]

We do not spend a trillion dollars a year on foreign policy. Not even if you include every dollar spent by the Department of Defense and State Department.
The budget for the entire government in 2008 was just under $3 trillion. We did not spend a third of that overseas. Nor does the war on drugs consume $400 billion. By your numbers, that would be half the entire budget for just those two items. But you are correct that the US has been spending too much money it does not have. Hard to believe the budget was in balance only eight years ago. Our debt has nearly doubled (grown by $5 trillion) in that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008

The budget doesn't include Iraq and Afghanistan. According to About.com, we spent $12 billion per month in Iraq alone.

And out budget wasn't in balance. That's a Clinton era fallacy. He borrowed from Social Security to "balance" it.

 

[liberteebell]

Frankly, the exact figures do not matter. The fact is that it's too damn much.

While we argue about the exact figures, those inside the beltway are systematically engineering the destruction of our country.

"A billion here, a billion there -- pretty soon, you're talking real money."

 

[Unspun]

We do not spend a trillion dollars a year on foreign policy. Not even if you include every dollar spent by the Department of Defense and State Department.
The budget for the entire government in 2008 was just under $3 trillion. We did not spend a third of that overseas. Nor does the war on drugs consume $400 billion. By your numbers, that would be half the entire budget for just those two items. But you are correct that the US has been spending too much money it does not have. Hard to believe the budget was in balance only eight years ago. Our debt has nearly doubled (grown by $5 trillion) in that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008

From your own quote:

"The Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan are not part included in the regular budget. Instead they are funded through special appropriations."

 

[Acala]

Black programs

And an unknown portion of the budgets of the CIA, NSA, and other "black" agencies are off budget but almost CERTAINLY huge.

That, plus the two off-budget wars looks like $1 trillion pretty easily.