Obomba to John McCain IV: "I'd kiss you, but there's too many watching."
Posted on 05/23/2009 7:17:02 AM PDT by autumnraine
Edited on 05/23/2009 2:21:14 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
'WE'RE OUT OF MONEY'
Sat May 23 2009 10:32:18 ET
In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."
C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president.
SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?
OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.
So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.
So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit.
So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it's too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can't afford it. We've got this big deficit. Let's just keep the health care system that we've got now.
Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything...
SCULLY: When you see GM though as “Government Motors,” you're reaction?
OBAMA: Well, you know – look we are trying to help an auto industry that is going through a combination of bad decision making over many years and an unprecedented crisis or at least a crisis we haven't seen since the 1930's. And you know the economy is going to bounce back and we want to get out of the business of helping auto companies as quickly as we can. I have got more enough to do without that. In the same way that I want to get out of the business of helping banks, but we have to make some strategic decisions about strategic industries...
SCULLY: States like California in desperate financial situation, will you be forced to bail out the states?
OBAMA: No. I think that what you're seeing in states is that anytime you got a severe recession like this, as I said before, their demands on services are higher. So, they are sending more money out. At the same time, they're bringing less tax revenue in. And that's a painful adjustment, what we're going end up seeing is lot of states making very difficult choices there...
SCULLY: William Howard Taft served on the court after his presidency, would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court?
OBAMA: You know, I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation...
Developing...
According to whom, Moody’s, lol? The IMF, lol? They have less credibility than the US government. The few nations that are in somewhat better shape than the United States are dependent upon trade with ... the United States. It’s not as if the world is in fine shape, and only the US is spiralling the drain.
I disagree strongly with the reasons for the debt, but as a percentage of GDP, it’s equivalent to the WWII era. Not insurmountable, in reality. With these clowns in office, adding to the tally daily, it may well be, but they’re not a permanent fixture.
Right, we are going to add about 50 million uninsured to the system [including illegals] and that will save us money and improve the quality of health care. We are going to spend our way out of debt with more borrowed money. No questions please.
(Oh, I forgot, We're broke and couldn't buy a lemonade stand from an eight-year-old.)
Obomba to John McCain IV: "I'd kiss you, but there's too many watching."
Reagan did so by not providing the government easy access to the money needed for massive entitlement growth.
He also made it a policy to restrain the growth by annual increases. This is what the Rats and media called cuts.
Obama is going to do this in the opposite way. He will take over whole parts of the economy and then force the people to pay for it in massive tax hikes later. He will do this and blame everyone but himself who signs it into law.
It’s become obvious this is his game plan. He plans on “breaking” the bad news to the people later. He knows the media will be happy to play along.
In fact this was confirmed when Paul Krugman made remarked just the other day that the government can deal with this problem since it has great power to deal with it via “taxes.”
The cat is out of the bag. You know the media will be right behind him. We all know that.
>>>Your SS contributions don’t belong to you per Supreme Court Case: Flemming vs. Nestor They belong to the USG
You know that, and I know that, but Joe public doesn’t know that thanks to the USSA propaganda wing commonly referred to as the “free press” or media.
So we organize our protests, our petitions, our tea parties, our watchdog organizations, etc. and think we are “educating” America and warning them of the deceit.
But the real power emanates from the vast majority of armchair Americans that would never dream of canceling their cable subscriptions for fear of missing the next episode of “24”.
Viewership ratings don’t mean SQUAT as long as we are all good little toads feeding the machine.
Looks to me like Obama is working up a big loogie.
OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits . . .
And a few paragraphs earlier, when talking about health care, he said “in a country as wealthy as ours...”
Hey Obama, we’re broke.
......Obama is creating totally useless jobs ......
He won the election and is placing first things first. He is providing rewards for the faithful while penalizing the masses. When the faithful are fat and happy and off his back, he will be able to deal with the longer term problem
What ever he does, it will not be good for the country
Oh come now. The Government sends me a statement several times per year showing me how much I've saved in my account. I've got the proof right here in my hands. It's my account and nobody can touch it. It's part of the sacrosanct contract between the people and their government.
Let's see how much credibility they have if they lower the rating. I bet a lot with investors, governments and private. There ratings affect bond rates in the real world.
The few nations that are in somewhat better shape than the United States are dependent upon trade with ... the United States. It’s not as if the world is in fine shape, and only the US is spiralling the drain.
So is that supposed to make me feel good or lessen the economic impact on this country if we have other countries sprialing down the drain with us?
I disagree strongly with the reasons for the debt, but as a percentage of GDP, it’s equivalent to the WWII era. Not insurmountable, in reality.
The national debt we have now does not reflect the more than $53 trillion in additional unfunded liabilities we have in the entitlement programs. In 1950 there were 16 workers for every retiree, today it is 3.3. By 2030 it will be two workers for every retiree and one in five amercians in 2030 will be 65 or older. We are in much worse shape than after WWII.
We also didn't have 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in our midst in 1950. And the population in 1950 was 151 million compared to 306 million today. The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 80 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born. Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in net immigration of 1.25 million. Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased from 203 million to 306 million, i.e., over 100 million. In the next 40 years, the population will increase by 135 million. Three-quarters of the increase in our population since 1970 and the projected increase will be the result of immigration. The U.S., the world’s third most populous nation, has the highest annual rate of population growth of any developed country in the world, i.e., 0.975% (2009 estimate), principally due to immigration.
The proportion of immigrant-headed households using at least one major welfare program is 33 percent, compared to 19 percent for native households. The poverty rate for immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) is 17 percent, nearly 50 percent higher than the rate for natives and their children. Massive low-skill immigration works to counteract government anti-poverty efforts. While government works to reduce the number of poor persons, low-skill immigration pushes the poverty numbers up. In addition, low-skill immigration siphons off government anti-poverty funding and makes government efforts to shrink poverty less effective. Milton Friedman said, “You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.”
87 percent of legal immigrants entering annually are minorities as defined by the U.S. Government and almost all of the illegal aliens are minorities. By 2023 half of the children 18 and under will be classified as minorities and by 2042, half of the residents of this country will be minorities. Generally, immigrants and minorities vote for the Democrat Party. Hence, Democrats view immigration as a never-ending source of voters that will make them the permanent majority party.
The out of wedlock birth rates for Hispanics is 50% and for blacks 68%. And school dropout rates for both groups is around 50%. This is the social pathology for failure in this society. By 2050 one in three in this country will be Hispanic. And the working age population is expected to be more than 50% minority in 2039 up from 34% in 2008.
We are heading for some severe problems in this country that will see a growing gap in wealth between the more well off composed mostly of whites and asians and the poor who will be mostly black and hispanic [both races]. Education will be the primary reason for this divide. The US will start resembling a third world country with increased social friction. And the huge federal deficit will siphon off money from the annual budget in debt servicing costs, which total $400 billion a year now and will increase to over $800 billion in less than a decade.
And then toss in rising energy costs as cap and trade hobbles the US economy along with the environmentalists who stop drilling, coal plants, and nuclear power without having anything to take its place. Our pro-population growth immigration policies will account for about three-quarters of the projected increase of 135 million in our population over the next 40 years. This is the equivalent of adding approximately the combined populations of the UK and Germany.
How does population growth impact our energy needs? According to Population-Environment Balance (PEB), 93 percent of the U.S. increase in energy use since 1970 can be attributed to population growth. In 1970 the US consumed 14.7 million barrels of oil a day compared to approximately 22 million barrels today with about 70% of the total now being imported. The Democrats are preaching conservation and Green technology, but fail to mention increased demand due to immigration-fueled population growth. We will have to run just to stand still in terms of meeting our future energy needs. If we were to reduce our annual immigration to 300,000 from the current 1.2 million, by 2060 the population would be 80 million less than the projected 468 million. How much energy would that save?
In sum, we are headed for the perfect storm with bankrupt entitlement programs, an out of control pro-population growth immigration policy, the lack of a realistic energy policy, a disastrous cap and trade program to fight the global warming hoax, and a socialist agenda inflicted against a largely uninformed, passive American electorate who don't have a clue about what is about to hit them in the next decade or so.
Someone once told me “It all comes down to beans, bullets, and booze”.
Well, no sh**, Sherlock.
He does look rather dapper with his new "makeover". The eye shadow gives him a rather "potus in drag" look, doncha think?
The Reagan Years (FY1982-FY1989)--The Reagan administration ran budget deficits in each of its eight years. The lowest deficit was $188.6 billion in FY1989 and the highest was $311 billion in FY1983. The Reagan years added $1.94 trillion to the national debt and averaged annual deficits of $242.23 billion.
During the Reagan years, the growth rate of total Federal spending was 9.95%, 8.40%, 5.38%, 11.10%, 4.65%, 1.38%, 6.01% and 7.44% respectively. Those eight years average a growth rate of 6.79%. Under Clinton, the growth rate of total Federal spending was 3.72%, 3.69%, 2.95%, 2.61%, 3.21%, 2.98%, 5.10% and 4.20% respectively. Those eight years average a growth rate of 3.56%
You are right. The ignorance of the American electorate is the Dem’s biggest ally.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.