CBO is saying it "can't conceive of anyway" that the economy can continue past 2037

[burniegoeasily]

This is scary. Debt 800% of GDP

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-...ath-do-nothing

[ipscshooter]

From politifact.com:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ts-due-rising/

What saves Ryan’s comment is that, despite his exaggerations, his general point is valid. The economists we spoke to agreed that that the nation’s current path of deficits and debt, if not altered, will become unsustainable.

"The issue is simply that under current law, the debt-to-GDP ratio soars so high that economic models break down," said J.D. Foster, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "The truth is that nobody really knows what would happen as the debt-to-GDP ratio pushes through 100 percent on the way to 200 or 300 percent. The models certainly are not capable of anticipating the effects. But you don't have to have an economic model to appreciate the clear picture of fiscal Armageddon."

Generally, then, Ryan’s oversimplifications and exaggerations lead us to downgrade our rating, but his broader point about the perils of the debt for the nation’s economy remains accurate. On balance, we rate his statement Half True.

[bergall]

Ok...so the train's got a full head of steam and is headed for a granite wall.
Why would anyone be stupid enough to propose a couple of billion dollars in federal spending cuts ? A band-aid is being offered when Major Surgery is called for ! This is FISCAL OBAMACARE.

[Alsatian]

Two comments.
(1) It seems to me that Obama and Democrats are on this spending binge because they want to permanently grow government. If they can make the spending stick, they will have significantly expanded government. Once this objective is attained, then they will substantially raise taxes to pay for the spending. It is a two step process. Will that work? I don't know. But I have to think they can do arithmetic also. I don't think this is unconscious behavior on their part.

(2) I am reading a sequence of histories on the French Revolution right now (same subject, reading a really short one to start, then reading a moderate length one, and then reading a really big one). All of them agree that the basic motivating cause of the French Revolution was the debt problem the French monarchy got into. I wonder if that is the direction we are going towards? I see signs of EXTREME discontent among people -- see the Tea Party movement as one manifestation but not the only manifestatgion of this discontent -- and this issue is not going to drop off the radar screen.

[Alsatian]

This may be a bit cross-ways of this subject. I hear the leaders of the Senate and the House talking about trying to resolve the budget impasse. It seems the Democrats want the Republicans to back down. Boehner may or may not consent to this -- some sort of compromise. But I think it is interesting to reflect on the event a few weeks ago when the House Republican leadership trotted out a budget and told the Republican representatives to rubber stamp it . . . but the freshman Republican representatives who had been elected by people who wanted the deficit spending to be fixed wouldn't do as they were told. It forced the respinning of the budget with bigger cuts. I don't know that these people give a $^#( about the Washington insiders spinning this as Republicans shutting down government. They were elected to address spending; they stand for election NEXT YEAR; they better not go back to their constituency expecting to get elected if they cave on modest spending cuts. And my guess is this issue is not going to be LESS significant in 2012, it will be more important.

[bergall]

Originally Posted by Alsatian

This may be a bit cross-ways of this subject. I hear the leaders of the Senate and the House talking about trying to resolve the budget impasse. It seems the Democrats want the Republicans to back down. Boehner may or may not consent to this -- some sort of compromise. But I think it is interesting to reflect on the event a few weeks ago when the House Republican leadership trotted out a budget and told the Republican representatives to rubber stamp it . . . but the freshman Republican representatives who had been elected by people who wanted the deficit spending to be fixed wouldn't do as they were told. It forced the respinning of the budget with bigger cuts. I don't know that these people give a $^#( about the Washington insiders spinning this as Republicans shutting down government. They were elected to address spending; they stand for election NEXT YEAR; they better not go back to their constituency expecting to get elected if they cave on modest spending cuts. And my guess is this issue is not going to be LESS significant in 2012, it will be more important.

As usual, your analysis is very accurate. I do not think the democrats are stupid, just hell-bent on transforming the republic into a socialist pit of mediocrity, debt, and sameness. Nobody wants to donate 70% of their income to government taxes but if the Dems get their way, they are using the Euro-union as their model of government and social services...which is alarming, given the state of European finances of late. The Swedish model is touted as 'the best' but nobody's talking about raising base pay for everyone here in the U.S. to match the per-capita income levels of the Swedes so I suspect that while they may not be stupid, they're not overly bright either.

As far as the 'new Republicans' (sounds better than Tea Party Candidates, even tho' that's exactly what they are) are concerned, I applaud their steadfastness. They need to resist 'machine politics' at all costs or this new wave of 'fiscal conservatism' will crash miles from shore and end in it's infancy. I would see the government shut down before I'd see them cave to the paltry and inconsequential 'token cuts' being pushed by mainstream dems and repubs. These New Republicans were elected to do a job and they'd better do it...there's so much at stake here, no less than the future of the Republic.