$455 billion Deficit

[StatiK]

The Bush Administration said Tuesday that the national deficit will reach $455 billion this year, 50% higher than estimates in February. This destroys the old record of $290 billion, set in 1992. This is even more drastic considering that only three years ago, there was a $236 billion surplus. Hmm...maybe we shouldn't have spent so much money on the "war on terrorism". Or maybe Bush is buying some more coke.

[TheShrike]

It still isn't as bad as it was during reagan's years.

I just hope he isn't re-elected.

[BWS]

Its not directly associated with the war, although the war sure doesnt help. Weve been in a resesion. Our spending goes up and revenue goes down during these periods. Its all techinical Macroeconomic shit, and im not going to explain it, but thats the main reason why.

[StatiK]

At 7/16/03 09:54 PM, TheShrike wrote: It still isn't as bad as it was during reagan's years.

I just hope he isn't re-elected.

Actually, it's a record. Meaning it's the biggest deficit ever.

[BWS]

I forgot to say one thing. You compared it to 3 years ago. We were coming out of a economic boom, or in other words, a growth phase. If you compare it to then, you get a huge differential. We usually dont recess so soon after a growth cycle.
Hint: buy a lot of stock, they will blow up in mass amounts in about 5-7 years (maybe sooner!)

[misterx2000]

A national deficit can actually be beneficial to a nation (macroecon stuff, like exports, exchange rates, etc), but it may damage public confidence if it's too big too fast.
And with lowered taxes, it's set to grow bigger!

[Slizor]

Actually, it's a record. Meaning it's the biggest deficit ever.

Depends if it is measured in inflation adjusted Dollars or not.

Maybe North Korea stole America's money. cuz they're evil and all.

[Cyric16]

I have a solution to the 455 billion dollar deficit.
TAX CHURCHES. Think about it, churches take in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. For example if we were to tax the catholic church alone, only on it's real estate holdings, that alone would wipe out the federal budget deficit. If the government was to tax all churches but only on real estate holdings our economy would sky rocket! Meaning lower taxes, higher budget, and more available jobs...

[Ted-Easton]

Canada has a surplus.

[Kantra]

it is amazing that the country has reached a 455 billion dollar debt when the government could cut military spending to lower the debt

[JMHX]

Either I've been up way too long without a nap (I'm taking pointers from Ted now on how to live the good life) or the debt is way off. Isn't our national debt somewhere around $6.6 Trillion? Or are we just talking about the year? Oooh, my aching head, I'm so confused.

[Ted-Easton]

We have a national debt that's continuously getting bigger, too. But we manage to not keep borrowing by a strange policy known as "Not waging multiple multi-billion dollar wars".
I don't understand how it works, but I think it has something to do with taxing unborn children.

[BWS]

At 7/18/03 06:07 AM, Cyric16 wrote: I have a solution to the 455 billion dollar deficit.
TAX CHURCHES. Think about it, churches take in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. For example if we were to tax the catholic church alone, only on it's real estate holdings, that alone would wipe out the federal budget deficit. If the government was to tax all churches but only on real estate holdings our economy would sky rocket! Meaning lower taxes, higher budget, and more available jobs...

That might sound good in theory, but its wrong. You see, its a non profit organization therefore the money is all spent in one way or another (salaries, and various expenses/contributions). This money is all funneled back into the economy. Its more efficient that way as well; tax money is used very ineficiently compared to individual spending.

[Commander-K25]

Here's a thought:

Eliminate our excessive and harmful social welfare programs and downsize the government bureacracy.

[TheShrike]

At 7/17/03 01:11 AM, liamgre wrote: Actually, it's a record. Meaning it's the biggest deficit ever.

Umm... no.

The American Economy is a large, 11 trillion dollar operation.

455 billion is about 4 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. The deficit has been as high as 6 percent in the past.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2814-2003Jul16.html

[TheShrike]

At 7/18/03 01:56 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Maybe North Korea stole America's money. cuz they're evil and all.

Kim Jong is an evil asswipe, and you know it. Just because bush says it is true, doesn't mean it isn't.

[JMHX]

At 7/19/03 12:40 AM, TheShrike wrote:

At 7/18/03 01:56 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Maybe North Korea stole America's money. cuz they're evil and all.

Kim Jong is an evil asswipe, and you know it. Just because bush says it is true, doesn't mean it isn't.

Kim Jong-il will become a problem in the near future, and it's one that I support the President on when he says we must take care of it.

[TheShrike]

At 7/19/03 12:48 AM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Kim Jong-il will become a problem in the near future, and it's one that I support the President on when he says we must take care of it.

I vow to fifenate the candidate who promises to nuke n korea.

[BWS]

I was just hoping that someone would come back at my response to them about this subject. No takers...boooo! As for a nuclear war with them, we ought to just take the good ole' shaddy route and instigate a war with them and another nation. Let someone else take care of it, weve spent enough money trying to be the Pappy 'o' the Nations.

[JMHX]

At 7/19/03 01:19 AM, TheShrike wrote:

At 7/19/03 12:48 AM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Kim Jong-il will become a problem in the near future, and it's one that I support the President on when he says we must take care of it.

I vow to fifenate the candidate who promises to nuke n korea.

Now Shrikey, why not just use your bat on Mr. Kim? He's short enough to get a lot of shots in to the forehead!

[Ted-Easton]

I believe we've (Canada) been rated the Number One place to live for many years, and when we're not, we're dancing a jig in the top five.

[JMHX]

At 7/19/03 09:47 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: I believe we've (Canada) been rated the Number One place to live for many years, and when we're not, we're dancing a jig in the top five.

But the nice places to live are always so bland. NORWAY? We'll eat some Herring that looks like my tongue and call it a party.

[Slizor]

At 7/18/03 11:23 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: Here's a thought:

Let people whose lives are determined by circumstances beyond their control die in the street from either starvation or the cold. This is the high point of Civilisation, this is what History has been working towards.

Yeah....good idea Commander.

[THE-HULKSTER]

This isn't exactly on subject, but didn't north Korea threaten to Nuke australlia a while ago?
If Bush dosen't take care of them, The crocodile hunter will.

[misterx2000]

If they ever attack Australia, retribution will be swift.

[BWS]

If only we could make them fight with Iraq. Eureka, Ive got it!!:?

[BootlegJones]

ya know, it's funny how George Bush jr. can take a 40 or 50 billion dollar surplus and drop it to an almost 500 billion dollar defict. That's why i'm an independent.

[BWS]

At 7/21/03 04:17 PM, BootlegJones wrote: ya know, it's funny how George Bush jr. can take a 40 or 50 billion dollar surplus and drop it to an almost 500 billion dollar defict. That's why i'm an independent.

Bush contributed to this, but he isnt the key factor.

Why is it that everyone uses him as a lame scapegoat when they dont really even know what theyre talking about. Its Bush's fault isnt always the reason why.

[JMHX]

At 7/21/03 12:51 PM, BWS wrote:

At 7/21/03 04:17 PM, BootlegJones wrote: ya know, it's funny how George Bush jr. can take a 40 or 50 billion dollar surplus and drop it to an almost 500 billion dollar defict. That's why i'm an independent.

Bush contributed to this, but he isnt the key factor.

Why is it that everyone uses him as a lame scapegoat when they dont really even know what theyre talking about. Its Bush's fault isnt always the reason why.

Ah, the reasoning I've heard so many times before. A good response is "George Bush is no more responsible for the sagging economy than he is for my aunt's goiter."