Hate to say we told you so, but we did. Economy is in trouble says CBO

126 replies [Last post]
Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010

"WASHINGTON (AP) — A new report says that the national debt is on pace to equal the annual size of the economy within a decade, levels that could provoke a European-style debt crisis unless policymakers in Washington can slam the brakes on spiraling deficits."
CBO says the nation’s rapidly growing debt burden increases the probability of a fiscal crisis in which investors lose faith in U.S. bonds and force policymakers to make drastic spending cuts or tax hikes."

But the spending continues. According to most Progressives we are not only not broke but on the road to recovery. Really?

The scariest part about the CBO report warns of a sudden fiscal crisis where investors give up on the Us Governments ability to get our fiscal house in order. If this occurs a fiscal panic may well force investors to sell their US Bonds forcing interest rates to rise exponentially. CBO warns, "Washington policymakers would have to win back the confidence of the markets by imposing spending cuts and tax increases far more severe than if they were to take action now."

“Earlier action would permit smaller or more gradual changes and would give people more time to adjust to them, but it would require more sacrifices sooner from current older workers and retirees for the benefit of younger workers and future generations,” CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said in a blog post.

Whenever one of us talks about soon to come austerity measures that have to be implemented the entitlement class screams about their program being cut. Look at the Medicare/Mediscare debate and Paul Ryan's plan to leave it alone for those receiving it or about to receive it. The Left has lost their freaking minds over this and yet our debt is going to force us to cut back on our standard of living soon any way.
What is the Administrations plan? Cut $1 Trillion dollars over 10 years. We are looking at a $1.5 Trillion dollar deficit each and every YEAR and Biden's plan would cut $1 Trillion form a $15 Trillion dollar projected deficit.
So are they serious? Not even close. Let me clue you in folks. Foreign investors i.e China already has lost faith in our ability to control our debt. They are not buying our debt. Ben Bernanke monetized our debt to the tune of $300+ Billion in Securities that China refused to purchase. They are facing their own inflation fears and their bond market bubble is about to burst.

We are facing an economic collapse that will change the way America looks today. Some think that is a good thing. I don't. I think there are Economic forces involved that want us to look Globally and move us into a One World Governance. We can keep turning a blind eye to the problems or we can face the music now. It's a matter of crashing. How hard and where is the real question.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU: budget

I think you forgot (maybe) the income part of the Biden proposal?

Everyone earning over 250-300,000 dollars per year would have a tax percentage paid increase after deductions of about 7 points.
Also, the corporate temporary tax reduction Bush gave corporations would be allowed to expire---no vote necessary.

Oil subsidies for quick write-offs against taxes would become standard depreciation and equipment write-offs.

There are also a few other smaller tax special benefits that others have (like getting a tax break for moving their factory overseas) and some of those would be changed.

I don't see many "job makers" among those groups. How many jobs have they created here with the benefits?

THERE IS NO PRACTICAL WAY TO STOP RAISING THE DEFICIT AND BALANCING THE BUDGET WITHOUT SOME ADDITIONAL INCOME.

We also have problems coming up with covering the 2 trillion dollars for the wars we have fought in the last 10 years. That was just spent---raising the loans we have. Never budgeted! Then there are the scores of thousands of maimed soldiers to treat and pension coming from those wars---another trillion minimum.

You tell me how to cut the only other places with any SIGNIFICANT dollars that would be helpful: DEFENSE, MEDICARE, MEDICAID, MILITARY PENSIONS AND HOSPITALS, VA, AND A DECENT HEALTH PLAN. (supposed to be a savings).

We can not "face the music now" as you say---only over several years.

It is also not Obama's fault in his 2 1/2 years---not yet anyway. More the Congress if we wish to leave out the past culprits!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
...and unless spending is radically decreased

the deficit will only continue to rise.

Just like a drug addict. You can't put them in charge of the pharmacy.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU

Just more "radical cuts" philosophy above what has been proposed!

Tell us where? If it isn't 2-3 trillion, forget it, it won't help much.

Otherwise it is just useless rhetoric!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
That's the point

it is useless unless it is $4+ Trillion AT LEAST.

BUT we can't keep spending after the cuts now can we? If they keep spending the cuts will be negated after just two years at the current SPENDING levels.

Roundone I kow you are like Dmom, Gort and Lion all stuck under a ideology, but we can not sustain the level of spending no mater what we do, and that's a fact.

The days of going shopping with unlimited credit cards are over. WE are on the verge of filing for Bankruptcy and more spending is not helping.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU

You are confused. Credit cards have nothing to do with the Federal budget.

We could sustain any level of spending as long as we collect enough taxes and other income to support it.

You didn't attempt to answer my question but I understand.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Arguing with idiots

and fence post. Both useless acts.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
OOU - Bacon

Any ideas on what happened to the Bacon?

Was he banned?

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
OOU

Or just one idiot, I agree!

BHH
BHH's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2011
Roundy, what does this say to you?

"WASHINGTON (AP) — A new report says that the national debt is on pace to equal the annual size of the economy within a decade, levels that could provoke a European-style debt crisis unless policymakers in Washington can slam the brakes on spiraling deficits."

It says unsustainable to me.

"We could sustain any level of spending as long as we collect enough taxes and other income to support it."

How can you make such an ignorant and foolish statement?

Although it may be a true statement in theory, it is impossible to collect enough taxes and other income to sustain the level of spending we are headed towards at this rate.

People are under the mistaken impression that the US government has the option of bankruptcy just like the individuals do.

There is no such bailout as bankruptcy for the government.

What happens is the economy just completely collapses and the dollar becomes worthless paper and turmoil the likes of which this country has only seen in movies like Mad Max or Water World.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
BHH: spending

First, I need to say that I really don't support any higher taxes on most citizens right now---just the corporations and folks making over $250,000.

As to the smaller corporations which are privately owned, they simply pay themselves enough so that there is no tax to pay for the corporation---done all of the time.

Then you put some family on the payroll if someplace else is needed to keep any individual from paying too much tax. Then uncle Charlie pays the light bill and buys the groceries for his salary.

There is another "theory" in our case here in the USA. We print our own money and can just give it to the banks at .0001% to lend to everyone for spending. Spending is what makes the economy grow! There is no need for the banks to pay it back--not at .0001% interest.

I don't get the connection between the debt and the GNP.

If you buy a house for $200,000 and still owe 180,000 on it and your salary is $75,000, isn't the debt much more than the income? Of course you can pay it over 30 years with interest charged, and end up paying $400,000 for the house!

I think the answer right now is to decide what we want taxes to pay for, then collect that much taxes from something or someone. No need to take running water and electricity away from most people!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Your village called they miss you

It is quiet obvious that you don't "get" stuff. But statements like:

roundabout wrote:

First, I need to say that I really don't support any higher taxes on most citizens right now---just the corporations and folks making over $250,000.

Show you don't "get" much of anything.

Let's explore this:

First you are asking the Government to use an enforcement arm of Government i.e. IRS to selectively enforce and/or PUNISH a group of people for the sole purpose of others benefits. The only sin committed by this selected group is that they are successful and productive and they already pay the lions share of the taxes.

roundabout wrote:

As to the smaller corporations which are privately owned, they simply pay themselves enough so that there is no tax to pay for the corporation---done all of the time.

It is also painfully obvious you don't "get" corporations and how they function.
Pay scales are set in the corporate structure and executive level scales are set by the board and is answerable to the investors for those salaries.

roundabout wrote:

Then you put some family on the payroll if someplace else is needed to keep any individual from paying too much tax. Then uncle Charlie pays the light bill and buys the groceries for his salary.

I wonder if your meds are wearing off with this statement. You don't just get to "put your family" on the payrolls there roundone and besides IRS rules dictate how family may be used and what counts as pay and has a whole section for taxing these "scams".

roundabout wrote:

There is another "theory" in our case here in the USA. We print our own money and can just give it to the banks at .0001% to lend to everyone for spending. Spending is what makes the economy grow! There is no need for the banks to pay it back--not at .0001% interest.

It is also painfully obvious that you don't "get" monetary policy. Printing money leads to a devaluation of the dollar i.e. inflation and the script we use is valueless unless we assign value. By working the system as you suggest paper money would become worthless. Wiemar republic anyone?

roundabout wrote:

I don't get the connection between the debt and the GNP.

Also obvious.
You make more then you spend-GOOD
You spend more then you make-BAD

Made it as simple as I know how.

roundabout wrote:

If you buy a house for $200,000 and still owe 180,000 on it and your salary is $75,000, isn't the debt much more than the income? Of course you can pay it over 30 years with interest charged, and end up paying $400,000 for the house!

Basically true-BUT- if you apply for receive and then max out 4-5 credit cards that $75,000 salary will not be sufficient to pay debt. You are correct on the cost of debt that $200,000 dollar home over 30 years would cost you closer to $500,000. This is a good example of our spending in today's dollars and why we say this administration is spending our children's future.

roundabout wrote:

I think the answer right now is to decide what we want taxes to pay for, then collect that much taxes from something or someone. No need to take running water and electricity away from most people!

Well see here you finally had an idea. It would be nice IF we could decide but we don't. We get people like Barbara Boxer spending money on Wine Trains and Nancy Pelosi spending money on programs no one wants. You see roundie we don't get to decide. Supposedly we send representatives to DC to REPRESENT our interest. What we get however are elitist ego maniacs that once they get there forget why we sent them there in the first place.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Observ, you sure have the patience of a saint. I have yet to

decide if our Round Bunkie is pulling our collective leg or if he really believes what he writes here. I find it hard to believe that someone could be that obtuse, then again we are talking about someone who uses seventy billion different names and then blogs under one and answers himself under another one- then denies he is even aware of what we are talking about when we call him on it. I imagine he always has dialogues with himself in his head-but it is really something to actually see it in print. Again, you do have the patience of a saint. Bless you!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Issues vs. Personal attacks

Personal attacks take away from the credibility of a cogent argument .

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Feel compelled to point out

that when Bacon was calling everyone and their family everything but a child of God you did seem to be in the cheering section every time.
Just wondered where that righteous indignation was then?

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Why does anyone respond to roundabout?

That's the only thing he/she wants is ATTENTION and people here seem incapable of simply ignoring a troll who wants that attention by constantly baiting others. Ignore him/her and they will go away and find some other playground to soil with their rambling BS.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Agreed, don't feed the trolls.

Not much more to add.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
NUK

I regret you are incapable of interpreting detailed facts, but are pretty good at simple emotions and opinions.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
And yet we keep electing them!
Quote:

What we get however are elitist ego maniacs that once they get there forget why we sent them there in the first place.

. . and yet we keep electing them! Does your representative truly represent your interests in Washington? If yes, by all means vote for him/her again ! If not - vote for a non- elitist intelligent citizen to truly represent your interest. That is what democracy should afford us. Evaluate your own situation. A vibrant economy must include revenue and growth. Regardless of ideology, in order to have these two parts of a vibrant economy, a society must have JOBS! Why have 'jobs' dried up? Have businesses been able to get funds to expand? Have regulations instituted to protect citizens been realistic? Regardless of ideologies, we SHOULD have members in Congress able to sit down and work out the mess we're in without throwing out the baby with the bathwater! We don't have to use scare tactics like sceaming 'socialism' in order to move ahead. We have examples of the failure of socialism (Cuba). To do nothing in order to insure that a President does not succeed is criminal, . . . and a disservice to citizens that are depending on the honesty and integrity of Congress. There is room in the so-called ideologies for compromise. Polls show that the President and the Congress are in trouble. But Congress is losing credibility rapidly. (20% approval rating). This next election must have more than 50% of the eligible voters participating in the election. Do you influence your elected officials or special interests? In a democracy, your weapon against the influence of special interest is your vote. Use your vote to send a message to Congress that doing nothing will not work in the future.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Success? DM

"To do nothing in order to insure that a President does not succeed is criminal, . . . and a disservice to citizens that are depending on the honesty and integrity of Congress."

Well wouldn't you say that that depends on what it is the President will do if he succeeds? What is success?

1. Enlarge the scope and power of the federal government.
2. State takeover of the health care system in the USA
3. Redistribute wealth to make certain that everyone has social "justice".
4. State buyouts of failing union led companies, if they are "too big to fail".
5. Marginalize American culture as an apologist for our successes.
6. Declare undeclared wars
7. Increase the national debt to over 14 trillion as of today, and keep the debt limit set high we can eventually default on our debt.
8. Promote class warfare and sap incentives for those that are creative and enterprising using the tax code as a weapon.
9. Increase the number of unemployed through all these measures

I would say mom that making certain that Mr. Obama is not successful is not criminal; it is criminal to let him do it. However, I suppose that you are quite happy with all these goals of Mr. Obama.

Say I am wrong.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
PTCO as usual succinct and to the point

Obama's supporters like Dmom are blinded by their own ambition and quest for power, vicariously delivered through the party.

Their goals and political intent are not even close to those goals by average Americans. Should their political aims be met America would start resembling France in no time at all. Government is the balm to solve all ills in their view.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
ptco - cute

Only refer to the issue that your 'canned' response can handle. You've never dealt with this one: Redistribute wealth to make certain that everyone has social 'justice'. What 'social' justice issues are you referring to? What was taken from your hard earned 'success' to insure my right to vote in Georgia? What was taken from your earnings to insure that my grandmother could vote along side my grandfather?

Now let's take on this Mr. Obama issue. To do nothing in Congress for four years in order to stop what YOU think is wrong is criminal. At least have the balls to present legislation and PASS it. The Tea Party is in - and still the House has done NOTHING! WHAT IS YOUR GOAL . . .to help the American people or stop Obama? Be honest. If the Tea's, the Libertarians, the Republicans, the Democrats can fix this mess - THEN DO IT! The lies, and attempted manipulation, etc., etc., etc. are so transparent that you are actually killing the Republican Party and the extreme right in this country. . (which is not a bad thing). Our so-called 'leaders' will sit down tomorrow and 'talk' - and you are really naive if you think that staff has not been communicating up to this point. SUCCESS: Slowed the road to economic depression; saved the auto industry; stopped insurance companies from excluding citizens who have pre-existing condition from health care; after 10 years, killed the man who killed 3000 Americans on American soil - and thousands of others in other lands through terrorism; restored respect for the US in many countries, including our so-called allies; improved services to veterans and their families and the families of active military; restored the hope in young Americans that one does not have to come from a rich, powerful, white family in order to be President of the United States; showed the world that the United States is overcoming its apartheid past; continues to value education and is taking steps to improve a public school system that is failing; etc., etc., etc.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Failure of Democrats to pass the budget

After a reckless spending spree and consecutive trillion dollar deficits, House Democrats in the 111th Congress failed to pass – or even propose – a budget. They didn't have the "balls" to do it, eh David's Mom?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
You got to love politics...

I sometimes wonder if the 111th Congress purposely did not pass a budget knowing that very hard choices lay ahead. A perfect opportunity to blame the other side.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
History

An interesting subject. Sometimes one finds that non-action in history was well orchestrated. Sometimes one finds that candidates are propped up and groomed to lose to assure victory in a future election. Sometimes these orchestrations backfire. . Interesting, eh? I think this happens when special interests feel they control the vote. Most polls state they use 'possible voters'. A big turnout has often trumped some polsters.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - I don't care BUT

DM I don’t care about the Republican or Democratic Party, I don’t care about conservatives or liberals, the only thing care about is returning to our Constitutional ideals.

The polarization that we see in our political process is nothing more than fighting over the spoils of ill gotten money taken from the people and future generations. It is nothing more that coveting power using the force of government. Re-election at all cost through paying special interests for the privilege of "serving" their interest.

This perverse expansion of government's role in society has caused vast divides within our country. To solve our problems we must return to the idea that government is conceived to protect our individual rights, not to regulate them, not to equalize social outcomes.

So, what can we do? Well there are a number of things that can be done but it takes an educated and informed citizenry to demand them. Unfortunately, government run schools have destroyed the ability for most people to think critically and independently. Believe me even the teachers believe the stuff they are teaching because they too were educated in government schools. Sadly most are simply unable to see beyond this socialist dogma and propaganda. So here are things that can be done, no matter how unrealistic they may seem at the moment, there will come a time when people will be looking for different answers.

1.Above all else, restrict the vote to those that produce wealth. If you work for the government, or derive your income in any way from the government, you can't vote. It is a conflict of interest for government workers to vote to increase their power and incomes.

2.Limit the terms of government officials, six years for Senators and two terms for Representatives. Define a limit for all others. Repeal the 17th Amendment.

3.Dramatically reduce central government spending; at a minimum significantly reduce the rate of spending increase. Reform and simplify the tax code and Repeal the 16th Amendment.

4.Reduce taxes just above the rate of reduction in spending – net result is to reduce spending more than taxes thus reducing the national debt.

5.Recognize and reward risk taking, savings and capital formation –
a. Incent innovation by giving tax credits on R&D expenditures, possibly 110% of expenditures.
b. Reduce capital gains taxes to zero
c. Eliminate inheritance taxes
d. Overhaul patent laws that are outmoded.
e. Eliminate taxes on savings interest

6. Attack the problems related to Trial Lawyers – Tort reform in every sector of the economy – key provision is to make the loser pay the bill.

7.Minimize government regulation and thus unleash the full intellectual capacity of the country. Remember that regulation does two things to make the country less competitive; a. it drains resources away from productive effort, and b. it comparatively puts the US at competitive disadvantage to those countries that have no such regulations. Pass legislation to toughen penalties on defective products, and negligence by unprincipled businessmen. Throw the book at them when they are guilty no matter how wealthy they are.

8. Drive government decision making to the local level and give local authorities more say on how they use the people’s money. It makes no sense to send money to the central government and have them give it back to local government. It is not efficient from an economic standpoint.

9. Reduce military spending as a percentage of GDP – we don’t need to be the world’s police. Protect our boarders and our people at home. Build the wall on the southern border or whatever it takes to protect our national sovereignty

10. Eliminate corporate welfare – we need to stop protecting unproductive neo-capitalists.

11. Get out of Banking & “private” business – initial efforts to inflate the money supply following the collapse of weaker institutions was the right thing to do to avert a panic and the FED may need to do this again, but government needs to let weaker banks and other companies fail no matter how big they are. If they can’t compete they can’t compete, just that simple.

12. Incent legal immigration of scientists, physicians, nurses, mathematicians, and wealthy individuals to the United States.

13. Slowly dismantle the Federal Reserve Bank (a private bank that controls the money supply).

14. Return to a gold standard or something like it. For those that don’t understand this notion, the reason we have major cycles in our economy is due primarily to the FED trying to manipulate the money supply. Tie the currency to a precious metal and currency can’t inflate because you can increase the supply of the metal quickly.

15. Require the Senate to confirm judicial appointments within a session or the appointee gets a pass into the court system without a Senate vote. If the appointee is appointed late in a session they have until the end of the next session.

If we do these things at a minimum, we will ignite the mighty engine once again. Fail to do these things and we will fall into the dark abyss of financial collapse.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

I appreciate your sincere desire for our country to return to economic stability. I'll answer later.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
Eliminate public schools, tax only the poor? Divide into 50 coun

I was going to comment on this bunch of impossibility but a couple of them showed me it was not worth it!

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
spy;oou;BHH

I fella like the dumbass FL state lawyers prosecuting the Anthony woman, and all of those Nancy Graces', and other such TV talkers who hung this woman before even the defense was given. The only evidence they had was that she didn't report the daughter missing soon enough due to the Grandparents wanting her to keep it hidden, which she did. She played the part to the hilt--even partying.
There is much more to prosecute in this case!

Now, as to your off-point remarks about my opinion of the current congressional budget; I'm not going to waste much time and answer ever objection you had---it is useless.

The "lion's share of the taxes are not paid by large corporations, and write-offs help the privately owned companies and retailers to pay little.

Your answer on a house cost over earnings is so wanglewopped that it says nothing.

I don't care what Nancy Pelosi gets---she answers to California, not you.
You need to look at GA Senators and congressmen and what they get!

BHH
BHH's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2011
Roundy

An S corporation pays no income taxes.

It still has deductions for expenses and makes a profit or loss.

The profits or losses roll over to the shareholders' personal taxes and then income taxes are paid or returned.

No social security or medicare/medicaid are due on shareholder distributions.

This is the only way to own a business.

Corporations do not support our government and never will or can.

If taxes become a distinct disadvantage the corporations simple dissolve or move to another country.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
BHH

I think you agreed with me--unintentionally! I owned two "S" corporations!

Is it that you want everyone to pay more taxes---without jobs and going into debt? Or a little from those who can pay it?

Surely you don't want huge cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and Defense?

This thing will be resolved soon just as soon as the republicans have milked every vote out of it that can be for the next election.

Getting re-elected is much more important to them than us!

BHH
BHH's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2011
Roundy

I'm not sure what we agreed on, but apparently the national debt doesn't work the same as a mortgage.

There is no longer anyone willing to loan the US any more money, even if the debt ceiling is raised.

Holding it down will increase the faith of those we currently owe money to and raising it will only serve to drive us further from their support.

If we stumble we risk being taken over by the helper, the same as foreclosure only with worse consequences.

If our debt repayment reaches so far into the future that those charged with repayment can see no light of day then we risk a revolt.

Which could mean default and potentially war to maintain our sovereignty.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
BHH: ????

We can't borrow any more money says BHH!
How can that be? What are we to do?
Debt doesn't have a sealing, just a congressional bill which is changed every year!
Most of those we owe money have no faith, as you say. They just want paid the interest. (I own some of that). I won't be driven further.
We won't stumble so that the helper can take us over. They wouldn't have any idea how to run this place.
Now as to revolts by us due to too much borrowing, that is not necessary---just don't pay your taxes!

The only people hurting by our default would be the credit lenders. We would just print some more money.

The Greeks have the Accropolis (SP) up for sale at 20 billion. The museum goes with it.
I'll bet Rushmore would bring a trillion! We don't have to have it.

We usually use a war to perk up recessions and make more jobs, but there seems to be no place worth fighting for any more. We ain't gonnal git nuthin outen iraq nor afghanistan nor Pakistan nor libya, nor yemen nor siria, nor north korea. We don't want nuthin egypt got.
Japan is shot and nobody wood evir git all the way crost China or indonesia.

NATO is a laugh, they air rite now outta bombs!
Enny day now Israel will atack someone to shove em back. We might hep thim!

I hope i'm clarer then youe war.

BHH
BHH's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2011
rndabout,

China owns most of our debt and they don't want any more of our over printed paper.

Not paying your taxes is a revolt. Remember the original one that began at Boston Harbor?

China would just run this place the same as they do at home.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
China owns less than 1/4 of our debt!

Just what would China do with those products we buy with their loaned money?

Please research a little and don't believe all you hear!

England and Japan own more of it than China?

Biggest owners----you and I.

BHH
BHH's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2011
Thanks roundone

I guess I've been getting bad info.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
BHH

No you are believing the republicans!

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Double Dip Recession in 2011

"A Gallup poll taken last month showed that confidence in the economy has fallen to its lowest level since March 2009, which was near the low point of The Great Recession.

A growing and vocal minority of economists believe that there will be a double-dip recession primarily because of the intransigence of high unemployment and the rapidly faltering housing market. The notion of a “jobless recovery” has been around since the recessions of the 1950s and 1960s. It is a concept built on a relatively simple idea: Employment lags during a recession but it is always part of a recovery cycle. Production rises as businesses see the end of a downturn and anticipate improving sales. They are reluctant to hire new workers until the recovery is confirmed, but once it has been, hiring picks up.

http://247wallst.com/2011/09/13/what-the-double-dip-recession-will-look-...

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
oou /PTCO

Let's see what these talks accomplish. .. .and of course the 2012 election.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Agreed

2012 will be a watershed election, the talks will be more of the same.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO and others - from today's Fox News
Quote:

What it all comes down to may just be re-election

If only we had some control of the hard heads in both parties! Mitch McConnel made it quite clear - he wants Obama to be a one term president - at any cost. There will have to be compromise on both sides in order for us to move forward. Boehner and Obama have a tough road to hoe.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DMom & compromises

Of course you're correct about compromises being necessary, as neither the Administration nor the Congress has the juice to go it alone. BTW, having chopped cotton, peanuts, tobacco, & corn, I can assure you that one does NOT hoe roads----rows, yes, roads, no!

Mike King
Mike King's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/29/2006
Now Gym...

...when it comes to those rows, you're citing my and likely your rationale for our time in the military.

Just wanted you to know that I sampled some great mustard based barbeque over the weekend while celebrating my mom's 87th.

Getting time for that adult beverage.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AHG

Thanks for the correction!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - road to hoe?

I guess this is your urban California background showing?

Ronald Reagen agreed to tax increases in exchange for future cuts at a ratio of 2:1. The tax increases happened but the spending cuts never happened. This is why Mr. Reagen gets bad press for running the debt up, he was working with a Democratic Congress at the time.

Let's cut spending first, then talk about tax increases. Prove that the Congress has the guts to control spending. It won't happen DM because there is no "spine" in the US Congress.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Obama-I will cut $4 Trillion over 10 years

but I will keep deficit spending at a rate of $1.5 Trillion per YEAR. So we we only be a LITTLE deeper in debt after 10 years.

In the mean time California looks to get their budget crisis under control by defining a "Hotdog"

Senate Bill 946...
“A 'hot dog' means a whole, cured, cooked sausage that is skinless or stuffed in a casing, may be served on a bun or roll.” The description also says hot dogs are also know as bologna, frank, frankfurter, garlic bologna, knockwurst, red hot, Vienna or wiener."
The bill - which is being pushed by Democratic Senator Ed Hernandez - passed the Assembly Health Committee today. Hernandez says the law is needed.. for public safety.
Do we all feel better now?

This is the Government you elected. Government making promises to cut spending while spending at more than twice the level of the cuts.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Pea-Brained Obama

Obama: Time to "eat our peas" and pass debt deal

"We might as well do it now," he said. "Pull off the band aid. Eat our peas."

Eat our peas? Is this the President of the United States talking?

First he states that we have to get in the back seat while the dumbocraps drive and now he says "eat your peas".

Unbelievable how inept a leader Barrack Hussein Obama is.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
Joe

Aw, go eat your peas! Although the man is a legal professor, he talks clearly---not like PhD's do to impress by confusion. Or like Boehner does! While crying!

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Peas and Teas

Tea Party Republicans act and talk like children so President Obama and the rest of us adults must talk to them in childish terms they may understand.

The T's want candy (no tax increase ever, ever or I will hold my breath until I turn blue)while everyone else sacrifices (eating peas I guess). I think I have carried this analogy as far as I can but you get the point.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Pea-Brained Barry

No Lion - The dictator Obama has no idea how to lead and get the job done - he has proven it over, and over, and over. The dems couldn't even do the simple task of passing a budget.

It is Obama that is immature. He is the one that started it all with his "I won" statement during his first week in office. He doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing.

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
President Obama

It is not dictator Obama. His title is Preisdent Obama. Do you ever read the U.S. Constitution? We elected him President of the United States. Deal with it.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Oh we are Lion we are..

and hopefully for only up until Jan 2013.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Tax increases

None scheduled until 2013. Those increases that are scheduled will come out of closing tax loopholes and from those who are making the real BIG BUCKS. The middle class can't take another hit now or then. Another thought/ these 'big’ businesses that must be protected from tax increases in order to provide 'jobs' - they have just had a big profit period during this difficult time - and still no jobs from the sacred providers. No confidence in the economy as they give themselves big bonuses and fly their corporate jets? I know someone here will correct my misconception of this picture.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Dmom economics is not your strong suit is it?

When you raise taxes on the persons making "the big bucks" as you call it, you raise taxes on the business owners and investors in business.

The inevitable results are:

1. Business owners that are hit with higher taxes may absorb some cost but the greater majority will either forgo hiring, allow a position to not be filled, let someone go or pass on the cost to consumers.
Either way the "Middle Class" is still being hit.

2. Investors that are hit with higher taxes have less money to invest thus entrepreneurs that want to create jobs will not find the capital needed to do so.

Dmom do you really believe an increase in taxes will solve the problem?

You did read my article "Why not soak the Rich to pay for it all?" didn't you?
http://www.thecitizen.com/node/7645

If not you should. You could confiscate 100% of all wealth and only get $4.3 Trillion dollars and you will only get to do so ONCE.

Dmom we are $14 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT and that is rising at a rate of $1.5 Trillion per YEAR. There is $112 TRILLION in unfunded mandates.

Do you think a tax on the "Rich" is going to fix that? Really?

Rhetoric and hyperbole is all this is. A broken record makes more sense then this.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Oou and other fiscal conservatives

A little reality check. The big buck guys have enjoyed the Bush tax credits for some time. Where are the jobs that they have created? Overseas!!! Corporate exec's have received substantial bonuses - and more Americans are unemployed. It doesn't take a masters in economics to 'see' this. The control of the Republican Party by the monied people and special interests in this country is becoming more and more apparent . The goal of making Americans suffer more under Obama than they suffered under Bush was the game plan. Obama and the Dems were naive to think that the 'right' was going to work for the American people. They are working to regain control and using the Republican Party as the vehicle to achieve this. Taxing the millionaires and billionaires in this crisis will contribute to the revenue that is needed. Expecting to get out of this mess in four years was an unrealistic expectation. If the 'new' guy is speaking for the Republican Party, Boehner needs to resign and go cry in private! I think the American people are tired of the rhetoric and drama from both sides. We have to pay our bills! Period. Where were you 'purists' when Bush was encouraging the American people to spend, spend, spend? Fiscal conservatives my foot!

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
DM: Revenues

I think where some fiscal conservatives were during the Bush era was in the bathroom heaving or forming the Tea Party. Bush and his fellow Dems/Repubs in the House and Senate pushed everything to about the breaking point, then Obama/Pelosi/Reid broke it with staggering deficit spending. People that before were concerned/upset finally decided it was time to demand CHANGE THEY COULD BELIEVE IN, which is why the Dems got annihilated in the 2010 House elections and some Repubs didn't even make it out of their own primaries.

The easiest way to increase revenues to the Fed govt is for the economy to grow, not tax increases on a few rich people that only lasts so long. About all the Obama Admin and his fellow progressives can do to help the economy rebound and grow is to get the hell out of the way and stop trying to impede growth. They are still screwing around with the excellent free trade agreements with Colombia, South Korea and Panama that would really benefit the US but Big Labor doesn't think they are good enough and still has enough clout to stall everything. It's ridiculous how a dying and rapidly-becoming obsolete labor movement is somehow managing to hold these agreements up when almost every economist, both the Clinton's, almost the entire Repub party,most Dems, all think they should have already been passed.

Now, if people want to talk about ending some of the subsidies and insane tax breaks Most Favored Companies that have armies of highly-paid ex-Congresscreatures have been receiving, I'm all for that. Some might call ending a government giveaway program as a "tax hike" but not I.
Start with Big Oil, Big Pharma(totally bribed in order to not go ballistic on Obamacare passing), Agribusiness, and then work down to the Planned Parenthood's and NPR's. Look at the long-term insanity of social entitlement programs that cannot be ignored. After all of these are addressed, I'll be happy to listen to proposals about raising taxes higher.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Nuk_1

I agree that stopping the tax breaks for the rich will not create enough revenue to solve our problem, but it will begin to share the pain equitably. The middle class and poor can't shoulder all of the burden. The 'job providers ' have not - are not providing jobs; the lending institutions are foreclosing on our military families - and these guys are laughing all the way to 'their banks'! No one is for raising taxes on the average Joe. Why are people not questioning the 'cost' of healthcare? The drug companies are not suffering nor are the companies that supply hospitals. Why are some hospitals charging .25 for a bandaid? Why does it take so long for the Feds to catch those who are cheating medicare and Medicaid? Some cheaters have fraudulently billed the Feds millions of dollars. It seems that once one gets to DC - the fiscal conservatism becomes rhetoric - and no legislation is passed to correct fraudulent practices. Oh well . .

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Can

Can we assume you didn't teach economics?

Did you teach something like math, reading or writing?

Or did you teach something like art, drama, literature or some other liberal arts subject?

Just curious.... ;-)

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Well, I realize that the 'trickle down' plan didn't work for most Americans. What has convinced you that your ideology will work for Americans? You know what they say about those who assume.

By the way, please also share with me the jobs that the sacred providers have provided for Americans in the last 10 years while enjoying the fruits of the Bush tax breaks. Thanks!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
So I assume - DM

That you taught something like social diversity?

I think you just answered the question concerning teaching economics.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
DM

I do agree with the "job providers crap."

We wouldn't have a reality unemployment percentage right now of about 20%
(30% for blacks), if 5% lower taxes on over $300,000 earners and corporations solved that problem. They have that NOW.

Whatever the percentage for those people they will find a way to deduct out of it.

Did you know that Oprah pays about 3% taxes overall on all of her empire!
By donation she decides what charities get her tax money! (like phony African schools for girls). All that will extend for a hundred years also.

There is always a way.

Usn's will end up paying it all.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Oh by all means let's be fair Dmom
Davids mom wrote:

I agree that stopping the tax breaks for the rich will not create enough revenue to solve our problem, but it will begin to share the pain equitably.

How is that Dmom? They already pay most of the tax. So how about let's get the 47% of AMERICANS that don't have a FEDERAL TAX LIABILITY to get some skin in the game.

After all since you finally admitted taxing the rich is just a sham..

"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."

Since it's just another political show why do it? Oh it makes you FEEL better.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
You pseudo conservatives

Need to get your figures together/line figures up with reality . . and deal with just a smidgeon of common sense. Taking 35% of my income and comparing it to 1% of Ophras is funny math that you so-called fiscal conservatives rely on. Ophras 1% won't have her trying to figure out how she's going to help send a grandchild to college. Even if she ends up paying 10%, she'll still have enough to fund the college education for more than 50 males a year and untold hundreds of needy students throughout the world. She has not taken her billionaire enterprise to anther country like Cheney and Halleburton (which has headquarters in Dubai). Some give back - some charge the US government exorbitant prices for 'security'. But you guys just go ahead and sooth your insecure egos with your funny math - and continue to support those whose words you like - and actions you conveniently ignore.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Dm do you have any facts to backup the rhetoric?

What good will it do DM? First she EARNED it. It is HERS not yours or Micheal Moore's and certainly not the Governments. She doesn't give but about 10% to charity but she is in the top 44% tax bracket already so she pays her "fair" share.

What about Jon Huntsman Sr? He is giving his BILLIONS away DM. He is going to die broke. Is it right for the Government to take that money to spend on Wine Trains dm?

Come on use your head for something other then a bonnet rest.

The Government can take every single cent of every single "rich" guy out there and it would only pay for TWO YEARS of this Governments spending DM. That is a hard fact and you can't change it.

All the rhertoric you and Media Matters can spit out can't change that. So taxing the "Rich" an additional 5-10% will accomplish what? It won't pay down the debt, the weasels in Congress will just spend it washing more genitalia in Africa.

So what will it do DM? Tell me.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Evade this DM

Still waiting for an answer DM

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Sorry DM...

...but have to take exception to 'lending institutions are foreclosing on our military families...'. Military members (Active Duty) receive BAH (Basic Allowance for Housing) if not residing on post/base, and many use it to purchase a home/pay the mortgage. If they lose their home, its probably due to their spouse losing a job and that they over-bought based on that income; Uncle Sam provides well for them on one salary alone - what they do w/ it subjects them to the same forces a civilian is subject to. I did see one news piece where a mobilized Reservist lost their home because the SPOUSE lost their job; it had NOTHING to do w/ them being in the military - but that media source tried to paint it as such. I do not know of any other case involving military members losing a home, but as said, if so it was probably due to reasons stated above. Do you have any examples of such?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Kc
Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Obama's lack of leadership Joe?

Even with this devastating economy - Obama has avoided a depression that after a surplus was left in the US coffers, a spend, spend, spend administration after 8 years left the coffers depleted. The drama that is occurring this week is a game of 'chicken' - and we all know what the result will be. As I said before, Obama and Boehner have a tough row to hoe - because of the 'children' on both sides who think it is politically correct to play this game rather than get down to work for the American people.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
****sigh*****

Obama has INCREASED that debt Dmom.

"In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan."

Obama has done just what Roosevelt did, make it worse and prolong it. We are in the beginning of what is going to be a very long Recession and could turn into a depression.

The work that the American people WANT Dmom is for Government to stop spending our children's future away.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Obama's 2012 proposed budget...

of Feb 2012 called for expenditures of $3.7 trillion while revenues were estimated at $2.6 trillion. The difference - $1.1 trillion - is one heck of a lot of money that we all could be on the hook for.

How about a little more about living within our needs rather than spending money on things such as teaching South African men how to wash their genitalia or studing male homosexuality in Vietnam.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cy

There is far more misuse of taxpayer funds than the ones you mention. Sending our men and women to fight with unsafe vehicles; paying a private security force to protect VIP's in the war zone; etc., etc., etc. In the past, we profited from a war time economy - the current wars, (budgeted and unbudgeted) have been a huge drain on our economy.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Good gawd Davids mom

You mean to tell me that we are spending money teaching South African men how to wash their genitalia and studying male homosexuality in Vietnam when our soldiers are going without!!!!! Does the commander-in-chief know about this? ☺

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Cy - This is

This is a classic.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Please share with us when these outrageous waste of taxpayer money began. Inquiring minds want to know. Thanks.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM- Well

it's hard to pinpoint exactly, but it started I think with Chief Justice Marshall, when he ruled on the commerce clause. Then of course we have the era during and following the Civil War when contracting for the government became all the rage. However, there are those that believe that the real robbery stated with the 1st Bank of the United States. Anyway, the outrageouus waste started early for sure.

Does this answer you question?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO
Quote:

Does this answer you question

No, but I understand it's the best you can do. Thanks.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Question DM

Maybe I didn't understand your question. Here's what you asked, "when did it start?"

Was there another specific quesiton that you had?

Perhaps you taught, political science?

bad_ptc
bad_ptc's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2006
Cy, if we study homosexuality in other countries

we'll learn how do deal with New York and San Fran Cisco.

It's rather common knowledge that it's cheaper to experiment on people you don't have to pay medical bills for.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cy - Lol

I didn't know until you told us! I think the additional stuff you mentioned cost a lot more taxpayer money - and in my opinion, another gross misuse of funds. I'm sure I would add to the list the granting of funds to study the sex practices of frogs, etc. I just want our so called leaders to get off their ego trips and concern of 'election results' and start working on solving this problem without destroying the middle class and developing a two class society - the haves and the have nots. Friends are showing me that the economic mess is not adversely affecting just minorities. I've traveled through Georgia and there are poor whites in Georgia that are worse than the poorest Blacks in Atlanta. We are the most powerful industrial country in the world . It is shameful that anyone in this country is living in such conditions as the American poor. We should be concerned that we work towards fixing this economy - not taking steps to add to the existing poverty in this country

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
I see where Henry County.....

is purchasing Tara Field from Clayton County. According to Lynn Westmoreland's press release, Henry County paid $2.7 million for the airport and 500 acres. Westmoreland further stated that the airport is expected to bring in millions in revenues to the county and is expected to spur economic growth around the airport.

Oh while he was singing praise for this acquisition he acknowledged that the FAA is going to pay $15 Million - 5 times the purchase price - to extent the runway.

Now this is the same Westmoreland that has a blog on his website that is titled "The Facts are Clear…Government Spending Will Be America’s Downfall"

Are there any of his supporters that wish to defend this?

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
Typical hypocrite

But it could simply be ignorance.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Cy - Westmoreland

No one should take anything the Congressman Westmoreland seriously.

He's part of the problem, not part of the solution.

No spine.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Westmoron & "FREE" Enterprise

Shouldn't a private company take this airport over. If it needs fix'n up, what about that race track next door? Why are they running the private movie studio off? I guess it got too much for Henry county to have "their" airport owned by Clayton county.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
bladderq - good

point, but just like other Congressmen, he believes his job is to send the money home.....to get re-elected.

Guess what?

It works.

Mike King
Mike King's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/29/2006
Cy

I would ask if the sale of the airport was stopped, would the same $15M be allocated for the runway? Perhaps a district boundary or some such foolishness is in play, but either way the whole mess stinks.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
It could be Mike.

The FAA might have had that money "earmarked" for that project for some time.

In the private business world, things can get so tight that the remaining employees have to purchase incidental office goods but the "guv", bless their little hearts, they just keep right on-going and spend money.

BTW, did you see where the Atlanta Public Schools said that it might be long while before they can fire the "wrong doers" in the cheating scandal. It seems that they're required to have their "due process" hearings. So they’re not going to teach according to the new superintendent but they're going to remain on the payroll. Ain't that great!!!!!

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
cyclist: Pay

That is almost as bad as the Wall Street guys who ran us into the ground leaving town with millions!
Or Beverly Hall's contract which says her salary and $500,000 in bonuses can not be taken away without a felony charge and conviction---that would cost more than to forget about it!

Now you know that no city employee (Chiefs, etc.) who are made to leave never are outright fired--they are allowed to leave with full bonus and pension! Stupid contracts!

Those contracts came about so that when republicans took over the government they couldn't fire all of the democrats (see Clayton Sheriff) and vice-versa.

You can send them to work at the jail on third shift, I think!

You can also destroy tapes of judges in a car.......

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Cy, Tara Field & the Runway`

I read it differently--Way I read it is FAA is spending $15 mil to help PURCHASE Tara Field. Either way, in my mind, it's a horrible expenditure of funds. BTW, Tara already has 4500 ft of runway--plenty for those corporate jets that fly in for the races! Oh also, they have no tower and Atlanta Center controls approach & departure.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
GYM

Just like the Interstate Highways, if an airport takes money from the federal government---which most do---then upon a need for those airports by the military, they are closed to civilians and for the use of the military only.

Same for the Interstates.

We would be back to driving on state and national highways. (If there was any gas)

So you see the Pentagon is always thinking of our safety around the clock 24/7 and on holidays!

There is one problem right now concerning the Interstates; most of them are in need of repair--mostly on bridges which need replacement.
States like Georgia refuse to gather the money to repair them ,which they were supposed to do for the 90% free roads, and they are in violation of their contracts with the government!

Now Georgia wants 90% free dams for water and power from the government and also have the feds pay unemployment for Georgia workers (we owe about a billion right now---off the books).

There are so many of this kind of thing which is not advertised generally--certainly by the states---that it is amazing that splinter groups like the stupid TEAS, Boortz, Hannity, etc, people aren't accused of their ignorance about it.

That is not to say that most of the liberals also want to forget about it.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Roundo & Airports

Don't know where you get your info but I was in warplanning for a number of yrs and never heard of such a "takeover"---yes, there is a plan to "appropriate" civil airline assets, but not airports. Regardless, your post does not address the smartness of a 15M expenditure by the FAA to help Henry Co. purchase Tara Field. And just so you know--no major mil units in proximity that would use Tara Field, no matter length of runway. You might want to jump another rabbit.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
GYM

Like most, you can't imagine we will ever be invaded and that a ground war may have to be fought on our soil! We would hesitate to use hydrogen bombs on ourselves!

Martial law would be immediate.

Most likely this war would come from within!
Remember General Lee?

Few more TEAS and such and it will be on.

Recent Comments