Government Spending

[Isaac]

Both parties have contributed to this without a doubt, especially at this stage of time when a certain minimum spending is considered obligatory in order to not let down promised recipients. Generally, the Democrats solutions are more geared toward spending money, while the Republicans' standpoint is more geared toward giving people opportunities and cutting government BACK to both allow and force people to be successful by traditional values like work, marriage, etc.

Excerpt:

Other expenses highlighted were $659 billion for national debt interest, $33.2 million for transgender monkey research, $6 million for boosting Egyptian tourism, and an unknown cost for USDA's dog-walking research in summer.

"Researchers found the Labradors’ fur color did not affect their body temperatures after a hot summer’s walk. That’s it. That’s the taxpayerfunded, cutting-edge study," Paul wrote. "The Agricultural Research Service at the USDA, which funded the study at Southern Illinois University, gets $1.7 billion a year from Congress, but it’s unknown how much the hot dog study cost the taxpayer."

Rand Paul's 'Festivus Report' exposes $900B in government squander

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., released his ninth edition 'Festivus' report showcasing $900 billion in federal waste.

www.foxnews.com

The good thing is his reports make very fun reading.

 

[Isaac]

I'd like to know whether my theory about washing dishes growing my fingernails longer is true too, but I won't take your paycheck for it

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Actually, I can see looking at transgender monkey research because it has been shown that humans have brain structures (independent of sex organs) that are normally associated only with a specific gender. Since the 1990s it has been known that people with mixed brain and sex organ structures are homosexual. It would be significant to find that the problem occurs in other primates as well.

Boosting Egypt's tourism? That one should only be funded by Egypt.

Dog-walking research? Dogs walk. They chase things. They poop along the way. They leave scent marks as they go. What else do we need to research?

 

[Isaac]

My dog also licks special parts of grass and flowers. I hate it, I never know what he is going to catch

 

[jpl458]

Both parties have contributed to this without a doubt, especially at this stage of time when a certain minimum spending is considered obligatory in order to not let down promised recipients. Generally, the Democrats solutions are more geared toward spending money, while the Republicans' standpoint is more geared toward giving people opportunities and cutting government BACK to both allow and force people to be successful by traditional values like work, marriage, etc.

Excerpt:

Rand Paul's 'Festivus Report' exposes $900B in government squander

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., released his ninth edition 'Festivus' report showcasing $900 billion in federal waste.

www.foxnews.com

The good thing is his reports make very fun reading.

Here is a chart of the debt by president. The Republican claim fiscal frugalness yet, I don't see it in the chart.

 

[Isaac]

Here is a chart of the debt by president. The Republican claim fiscal frugalness yet, I don't see it in the chart.

View attachment 111606

I'm not sure the amount of debt has much to do with the President. The happening to be President at the time certain bills were passed and that certain events occurred may have a mild correlation but that's about it. For example, people don't usually blame Trump for Covid happening but we do blame Democrats for their extremely expensive response to it with regard to people's ability to work, school, parent and generally participate in the economy.

The Democrats' solutions definitely tend to be spending. The Republicans have certain things they like to spend on, (military, for example), but the Democrats tend to exclusively come up with solutions that require spending a lot of money.

All I know is, every time I hear a Democrat talk about a solution it's spending money. 3/4 of those times the Republicans are trying to stop it.
Student loan forgiveness is a great example. Why spend money on forgiving loans that lucid people willingly took out? How is that fair to anyone else?

Another big factor is whose money is being spent, which is an issue you can slice and dice a million different ways.

I can't remember the last time I heard a major Democrat-sponsored bill as a solution to a substantial problem that didn't simply involve spending more money to give people stuff.

Remember Covid? Democrats: pay people not to work. Republicans: let people work.

It's a worldview on government difference.

There's a major ship to be steered; I'd guess if Republicans had majority control it would take at least 2 administrations or more consecutively to reverse the national debt trend, if not more. Thus the chart is not much good.

This is why I don't tend to be directly critical nor attribute success in a very direct manner from , say, jobs report to president. We know Covid has receded, we know those restored jobs have nothing to do with Biden, and the same may be true from jobs gained under a Republican president.

I do know one thing. We have a major debt problem, and our solutions need to be trained on a cultural shift toward encouraging and requiring people to work, rather than spending more money to give them more creature comforts. Preferably before we have to be one of those countries where people are rioting over "austerity measures" which is a fancy way of saying, we were stupid and spent too much money.

 

[Isaac]

You bring up another good point - rhinos. Which is to say, what the party wants, they don't always get.

Hypothetically even though government spending were precisely the same between party administrations and majority rules, that could be because of political pressure to cave to what was being sold the public at the moment - and it can still be true, and most definitely is, that one party relies far more on "spend more money" solutions than the other one does. Mostly because one party thinks we need a bunch of solutions that we don't even need. Hence the notion less government, more government. Do we need to pay 3 year olds to go to "school", etc. etc.

"I'll take a side of ..... Everything, please" = sounds good when you're spending other people's money.

 

[conception_native_0123]

Here is a chart of the debt by president.

what a bunch of bullshit. Doesn't matter where a chart or graph comes from regarding the government and its finances. It can't possibly be right, and never can be. My God. Remember, it's called POLITICS. aka - LYING.

 

[AccessBlaster]

what a bunch of bullshit. Doesn't matter where a chart or graph comes from regarding the government and its finances. It can't possibly be right, and never can be. My God. Remember, it's called POLITICS. aka - LYING.

Does Biden's debt include Ukraine, apparently we're funding every aspect of their lives including retirement.

 

[AccessBlaster]

All the faster to bankrupt us

At least the Repubs have tied new funding to the border, that's a start.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I can't explain the uptick for Regan without research.

Pat, Reagan outspent the Russkis with the "Star Wars" project (satellite research) that bankrupted the USSR and split them off into independent countries.

 

[Isaac]

Pat, Reagan outspent the Russkis with the "Star Wars" project (satellite research) that bankrupted the USSR and split them off into independent countries.

Like I said, not all spending is the same.

Being fiscally smart isn't exclusively about saving money, it's about channeling it into best places.

When I hear of a huge amount of my tax money being spent on the military, and I Look around the world, I'm OK with that, sort of. As long as its preventative and keeps us competitive - not useless wars.
When I hear of my money being spent on dumb stuff, and giving a bunch of free stuff to people not paying those same taxes, and we're getting in debt for that too, that stinks.

 

[Cronk]

US National debt is now $33.7 trillion. About half of Treasury debt matures in the next 3 years. If that debt is rolled over with current interest rates, the interest on debt will rise from around $700 billion to about $2 trillion. They keep kicking the can down the road but that road is not endless. Within 5 years, interest expense could be half of tax receipts.

 

[AccessBlaster]

When I hear of a huge amount of my tax money being spent on the military, and I Look around the world, I'm OK with that, sort of...

Unfortunately much of what makes up the military budget is off the books or black budget items making it impossible to put a figure on it.

 

[conception_native_0123]

Does Biden's debt include Ukraine

it should. but then again, my previous post still stands.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Yeah, it's all smoke and mirrors.

 

[Isaac]

Unfortunately much of what makes up the military budget is off the books or black budget items making it impossible to put a figure on it.

I didn't know that

 

[Steve R.]

The quote below bears repeating, since the members of Congress have little incentive to actually control (restrain) spending. Moreover, there is little incentive for the government to control spending under Modern Monetary Theory, which holds that: "According to MMT, governments do not need to worry about accumulating debt since they can create new money by using fiscal policy in order to pay interest.". Creating "new money" undermines the very meaning of what money is supposed to represent, which is "wealth". Wealth being real physical assets that you can touch, such as a house and/or gold. The net consequence of Modern Monetary Theory is inflation.

The quote below, has often been attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville. Evidently, according to CheckYourFact, that's not true. Nevertheless it perfectly sums up what Congress is doing. Bribing many through the promise of welfare. Needless to say, those craving welfare would vote for those politicians thereby exacerbating limitless deficit spending.

The American Republic Will Endure Until The Day Congress Discovers That It Can Bribe The Public With The Public’s Money’.

 

[Isaac]

The quote below bears repeating, since the members of Congress have little incentive to actually control (restrain) spending. Moreover, there is little incentive for the government to control spending under Modern Monetary Theory, which holds that: "According to MMT, governments do not need to worry about accumulating debt since they can create new money by using fiscal policy in order to pay interest.". Creating "new money" undermines the very meaning of what money is supposed to represent, which is "wealth". Wealth being real physical assets that you can touch, such as a house and/or gold. The net consequence of Modern Monetary Theory is inflation.
The quote below, has often been attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville. Evidently, according to CheckYourFact, that's not true. Nevertheless it perfectly sums up what Congress is doing. Bribing many through the promise of welfare. Needless to say, those craving welfare would vote for those politicians thereby exacerbating limitless deficit spending.

It's a good point, but sometimes I feel like something even more nefarious is happening.

The problem of a few people (half of America who pays taxes) paying for everyone else's lives will continue to get worse and worse, because we allow people with no skin in the game to vote. Why should people who pay no taxes vote ??? All they're going to do is keep voting against the taxpayers to get more $ from them. And of course, more and more people will then join the side who gets to vote without paying taxes - ultimately shrinking the taxable group so small that either 1) they'll revolt, and it will be a strange revolt against the poorer people paying no taxes but getting lots of gov services, or 2) they'll be unable to sustain the benefits that the tax-less side wants.

As long as we allow people with zero investment in the system to vote themselves benefits from the system, this problem will get worse and worse and worse.

 

[Steve R.]

we allow people with no skin in the game to vote

In responding to this thread, I actually left out our prior discussion where we discussed this very issue.
We discussed this in the thread: "Once Again Republicans Blink and Sellout to Democrats".

As you wrote: "As long as we allow people with zero investment in the system to vote themselves benefits from the system, this problem will get worse and worse and worse." This is a serious situation. It will also get worse with the influx of illegal immigrants who will be demanding resources (humanitarian aid) that they are not entitled too.