No. of Recommendations: 14
The Congressional Budget Office seems to think so.

http://spectator.org/blog/54699/cbo-america-going-bankrupt

For much of this year, the loony librul left has contended that America no longer has a spending problem, citing a shrinking deficit for 2013.

However, in the latest Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report released last week, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf blew that theory out of the water:

"The federal budget deficit has fallen faster than we expected a few years ago, and projected deficits have been reduced relative to what we expected would occur if the policies in place at that time were continued. However, relative to the size of the economy, debt remains historically high and is on an upward trajectory in the second half of the coming decade.

The fundamental federal budgetary challenge has hardly been addressed: The largest federal programs are becoming much more expensive because of the retirement of the baby boomers and the rising costs of health care, so we need to cut back on those programs, increase tax revenue to pay for them, or take some combination of those actions. Those choices are difficult, and the decision as to when we should implement such changes is complicated by the negative effects they could have on the economy if they took effect while it is still fairly weak."

Moreover, the CBO released its newest long-term debt projections for the federal government’s publicly held debt yesterday morning [9/17/13]--and the picture is as bad as Elmendorf claimed. Four numbers in particular stand out:

~ Under budget assumptions that are relatively optimistic, CBO expects publicly held debt to reach 108% of GDP in 2038.

~ If deficits go up by $2 trillion dollars more than the first set of budget assumptions by 2023, publicly held debt in 2038 will be 190% of GDP in 2038.

~ If $2 trillion is cut compared to the first assumption by 2023, the debt level would be slightly smaller than it was in 2012, at 67% of GDP.

~ And if Congress acts to cut $4 trillion compared to the first budget assumption by 2023, the publicly held debt would be lower than the level in 2007, at 31%.

In other words, unless Congress acts decisively to curb spending, America will incur unprecedented levels of debt.

It’s long past time to make real cuts to the federal budget, including to the entitlement programs the American people value the most. If we do not, it is possible that the United States will face an existential debt crisis that will make the financial collapse of Greece appear tame.

***

Comment on the article: Krugman says all is well and he has the Nobel Prize in economics and not me. Who am I to say that going into debt in the trillions of dollars might make the country go bankrupt?

And there you have it: libruls don't care about America turning into Greece. We're doomed so long as libruls are in charge.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The government does it's typical 'doublespeak' dance and the loony left believe it.

Metal
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And there you have it: libruls don't care about America turning into Greece. We're doomed so long as libruls are in charge.

Care to try again--but base your claims on facts this time? Or not?

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/TESTIMONY/2001/20010...

'The most recent projections, granted their tentativeness, nonetheless make clear that the highly desirable goal of paying off the federal debt is in reach before the end of the decade.'

Explain why that did not happen. If you dare.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Explain why that did not happen. If you dare. ~jerryjibjab

Doesn't matter. That was then. This is now. Baracky has put us additional trillions of dollars in debt--more than all past presidents combined.

Explain that. If you dare.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No, but it does appear to be drowning in wingnut BS.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
It's amazing that libruls can recognize that we're trillions of dollars in debt and still deny that American is going bankrupt.

Amazing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Explain why that did not happen. If you dare. ~jerryjibjab

Doesn't matter. That was then. This is now. Baracky has put us additional trillions of dollars in debt--more than all past presidents combined.

Explain that. If you dare.


Employment figures from BLS B-1:

Jan 2002: 130,847,000 Start of conservative economic policy period
Dec 2009: 129,687,000 End of conservative economic period
Job created: (1,160,000) Great conservative job creation record
Missing: 2-million jobs/year for 8 years (new workers entering workforce)
Total jobs LOST due to failed conservative economic policies: 17,160,000

If you don't like the math, perhaps you are better at basketweaving.....
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
...projected deficits have been reduced...

This is all you need to know. They are still projecting DEFICITS. Even if smaller than they thought, they are DEFICITS.

Ergo, we still have a spending problem and will sooner or later go bankrupt.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
cc
It's amazing that libruls can recognize that we're trillions of dollars in debt and still deny that American is going bankrupt.

Amazing.


Not as amazing as FMNH who states ad nauseam that we are paying down the debt and just ship 'fiscal' shape as a nation.

Metal
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
jerry

Jan 2002: 130,847,000 Start of conservative economic policy period
Dec 2009: 129,687,000 End of conservative economic period
Job created: (1,160,000) Great conservative job creation record
Missing: 2-million jobs/year for 8 years (new workers entering workforce)
Total jobs LOST due to failed conservative economic policies: 17,160,000

If you don't like the math, perhaps you are better at basketweaving.....


We get that. Especially the tight fiscal conservatives and libertarians on RECF.

But please explain why Obama double downed on 'stupid'?

Metal
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But please explain why Obama double downed on 'stupid'?

Metal


And if it were not for the tea party people in the House, the democrats would triple down on stupid.

Metal
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Jan 2002: 130,847,000 Start of conservative economic policy period

On what planet?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But please explain why Obama double downed on 'stupid'?

Metal
_________________________

?????????

You think it's easy getting jerry's support?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
And if it were not for the tea party people in the House, the democrats would triple down on stupid.
__________________________________

And like Romans at the coliseum, the Republicans would have cheered them on.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Jan 2002: 130,847,000 Start of conservative economic policy period

On what planet?


The one where "supply side economics" created 16-million jobs, NONE of them in govt, remember?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Don't you just love liberal numnutz who basically make the argument that the patient isn't going to die because he's bleeding slower now!

And these are the same geniuses who are running healthcare. As in, into the ground. 'Progress' at the Speed of Stupid.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
But please explain why Obama double downed on 'stupid'?

Ego.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement