White House Projects 2005 Deficit at $427 Billion

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The largest deficit in the history of our nation. Larger than ALL the third world countries deficits put together. Not only that, but ith this disaster of a deficit, Bush wants ANOTHER 80 BILLION DOLLARS FOR IRAQ! Im getting sick of him spending my tax money on murder



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House estimated on Tuesday that the U.S. budget deficit for 2005, including an extra $80 billion for Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) operations, will total $427 billion.


www.newsalerts.com...:22586


"Difficult debates and choices are at our doorstep," said Sen. Judd Gregg (news, bio, voting record) (R-N.H.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and an administration ally who has called for new controls on entitlement spending. "If we do nothing, our kids and grandkids will be overwhelmed by the cost of our inaction."

Bush on Feb. 7 will send Congress his proposed budget for the fiscal year that begins in October — setting off a debate among Republican lawmakers on how to balance the competing goals of deficit reduction, extending the president's tax cuts and approving an overhaul of Social Security (news - web sites) that could cost more than $1 trillion.

In July, the administration had projected this year's budget deficit would hit $331 billion. The deficit last year was $412 billion, a record.


www.newsalerts.com...:22961

I think that Sam Walton should run our economy for a while. At least he would do better at it than that money eating idiot Bush.




posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:39 AM
link   
He will probably get what he wants.

The de-dollarisation process is taking place in various countries.

I had a conversation yesterday with a financial guy and he advised to get out of the US$. Says that the government is just printing money at this point.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by dixon
He will probably get what he wants.

The de-dollarisation process is taking place in various countries.

I had a conversation yesterday with a financial guy and he advised to get out of the US$. Says that the government is just printing money at this point.



Well, when you take into account that the dollar is backed up by our gold reserves, and that those gold reserves are not even close to the amount of money we print, it doesnt take a genuiss to figure out that our dollar is going to fall flat on its face.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Kidfinger our currency hasn't been backed up by gold reserves in well over 50 years. Our currency is backed by the full faith and credit of the US government.
As for the euro taking over the dollar relax, this is a temporary situation that the US gov isn't even attempting to rectify. Thats why the finance minsters of france and germany have publicly berated the US's policies. The strong euro is hurting the EU more than us.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kidfinger

Originally posted by dixon
He will probably get what he wants.

The de-dollarisation process is taking place in various countries.

I had a conversation yesterday with a financial guy and he advised to get out of the US$. Says that the government is just printing money at this point.



Well, when you take into account that the dollar is backed up by our gold reserves, and that those gold reserves are not even close to the amount of money we print, it doesnt take a genuiss to figure out that our dollar is going to fall flat on its face.


I think it was Nixon that took us off the gold standard. The Dollar" is backed up by our "economy".



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Yes, I know our dollor is not backed up by the gold standard anymore. However, the dollar is worth one dollar in gold. We dont have enough gold to counter the dollar. Our dollar is still weighed agianst gold, even though we do not use the dollar to gold standard any more.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   

The largest deficit in the history of our nation. Larger than ALL the third world countries deficits put together. Not only that, but ith this disaster of a deficit, Bush wants ANOTHER 80 BILLION DOLLARS FOR IRAQ! Im getting sick of him spending my tax money on murder


Well, you can thank the Bush voters for that...
Glad to say, I'm not one of them. I'm more sick of him spending MORE money than is needed, if he had done the job the RIGHT way in the first place, in Iraq.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Well, that's the point is it not ?

Gold standard : nowhere close in reserves.

Strength of economy : confidence is collapsing.

US$427B deficit ? That's on today's numbers. In real terms, it will be a hell of a lot more when the slide continues.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
I'm more sick of him spending MORE money than is needed, if he had done the job the RIGHT way in the first place, in Iraq.


We never should have been there in the first place. We should have alotted every cent we put into Iraq, into finding and capturing OBL. He might have had a better response from the Liberal crowd if he had accomplished what he originally set out to do. Instead, he F's up our economy, hedges the US in a war it shouldnt have been in, and continues to make a general arse out of himself at every given opportunity. Bush is not a leader. He is a fighter with one thing on his mind. Global violence.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 08:55 AM
link   
it should be fairly oves at this point the goverment is Over spending on purpes. The reasion being that if the dollor gets devalued enough it will stimulate enocimal growth on par with what it was like in the 60des.
alest this seams to be the idea but as to if it works or not remains to be seen .Regurdless we are in for 5 to 10 years of hard times here in the states as inflation goes sky high and has been going sky high already .
look at history and back in 1900 the same excat patteren was happing .it comalated with WAR and again in 19222 and again it ended with war.
here we are 2005 at war for 5 years trying to reproduce the enconimal jump that usaly results from this.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Simcity4Rushour

here we are 2005 at war for 5 years trying to reproduce the enconimal jump that usaly results from this.


Using a war to jump start our economy? The idea is so stupid( That in no way implies you are stupid. You did not come up with the idea
) that it sounds like something Bush would favor. I can hear him now. " Well Dick, our dollar is not worth what it used to be, what can we do about it?...Oh, I know! Lets start a war to devalue the dollar in the hopes of an economic rebound! Who cares if thousands of people die."


[edit on 1/26/05 by Kidfinger]



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Wars most certainly can help economies but I'm not so sure the Iraq war will (it will a bit but nothing huge). The most extreme case of a war helping a countries economy would be the US in WW2. During the war they were making far more money then they could spend by selling weapons, food and supplies ect. to countries that were having their industry destroyed e.g. UK, Russia, China ect. The US also made the UK sell it's foriegn assets as part of the lend lease agreement which took the UK out of play as a major competitor for foriegn trade and overall production compacity after the war.

Anyway for a huge economic boom to be the result of a war you really need supply and demand to be increase whether it's weapons needed or other comodities being needed because of the destruction of another countries industrial compacity. The best case senario is where you are the only country capable of meeting the trade demand of other nations so they have to buy from you, like what happened after WW2.


[edit on 26-1-2005 by Trent]



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   
He's not directly spending tax money on murder. It's just an unavoidable consequence when he decides to spend tax money on defence contractors and wishes to give his inner circle lucrative oil related contracts.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by dixon
He's not directly spending tax money on murder. It's just an unavoidable consequence when he decides to spend tax money on defence contractors and wishes to give his inner circle lucrative oil related contracts.


I know he is not directly coming out and sanctioning murder with our tax dollars. But murder is a part of war. When you have a war, you have murders. Thye are legal murders that you cannot be prosecuted for. When bush spends tax money on defence contractors and lines his oil companies pockets with cash, he is indirectly sanctioning murder with my tax dollar.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Precisely.

Glad my point has been made.

His priorities are the issue here.



[edit on 26-1-2005 by dixon]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
My ignored post below shows that Bush's tax cuts where responsible for a $54 billion surplus in the last quarter. We need more tax cuts immediately in addition to more spending cuts!

politics.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 11:50 PM
link   
zfacts.com...

Bushs are financially irresponsible





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join