Federal domestic spending increased a record 16 percent, to $3.2 trillion, in 2009, "the Census Bureau reported Tuesday, largely because of a boost in aid to the unemployed and the huge economic stimulus package enacted to rescue the sinking economy."
"The rise in spending was the largest since the Census Bureau began compiling the data in 1983. The Washington region was among the biggest beneficiaries of the government’s spending"
"It’s the Iraq War that caused the deficits. It’s the Bush tax cuts that caused the deficits. The CBO said the deficits were caused by government spending but the Democrats continue with the same ol’ tired lies to cover their historic, record-setting spending sprees."
Originally posted by utherpendragon Federal domestic spending increased a record 16 percent, to $3.2 trillion, in 2009, "the Census Bureau reported Tuesday, largely because of a boost in aid to the unemployed and the huge economic stimulus package enacted to rescue the sinking economy.[/b]
Cutting the aid to the unemployed, in the teeth of the recession, would have been a disaster. Some are now saying the stimulus package should have been bigger, and handled differently. The $3.2 trillion figure, if true, rather makes nonsense of whodey's claim that the stimulus alone was $100 trillion. But perhaps he will be releived to find it's far less than $100 trillion.
Originally posted by FMF Cutting the aid to the unemployed, in the teeth of the recession, would have been a disaster. Some are now saying the stimulus package should have been bigger, and handled differently. The $3.2 trillion figure, if true, rather makes nonsense of whodey's claim that the stimulus alone was $100 trillion. But perhaps he will be releived to find it's far less than $100 trillion.
No one said anything about cutting aid to the unemployed.
Originally posted by FMF Cutting the aid to the unemployed, in the teeth of the recession, would have been a disaster. Some are now saying the stimulus package should have been bigger, and handled differently. The $3.2 trillion figure, if true, rather makes nonsense of whodey's claim that the stimulus alone was $100 trillion. But perhaps he will be releived to find it's far less than $100 trillion.
Originally posted by zeeblebot welfare for bankers. they hardly need it.
Yes, as I say, it was handled incorrectly, although I cannot see how the body politic in the U.S. could have resisted the 'temptation' to give it to the institutions that it did.
Originally posted by FMF Fair enough. Your OP attributes the rise in spending to it. What would you have cut exactly at the time that the recession hit?
"Waste and fraud" seems to be the standard right wing answer.
Originally posted by FMF Fair enough. Your OP attributes the rise in spending to it. What would you have cut exactly at the time that the recession hit?
Unemployment benefits are given out by the states. 26 weeks I believe. The Feds jumped in and extended it to 90 something weeks ( I forget exactly how many).
The "stimulus" bill. We were sold on the idea (I am paraphrasing) "if we don't act now unemployment could hit 8%". What are we at now?
The bail outs.
cash for clunkers,etc.
The spending needs to stop. There are politicians crying for more.
As it says in my link,
"Federal spending is what causes deficits. Tax cuts do not. In other words, when you have a decrease in tax revenues (tax cuts) you do not go out and spend more money than you have in your pocket. The bank (taxpayers) are on a budget. Congress needs to learn how to balance a budget."
Originally posted by utherpendragon "Federal spending is what causes deficits. Tax cuts do not. In other words, when you have a decrease in tax revenues (tax cuts) you do not go out and spend more money than you have in your pocket. The bank (taxpayers) are on a budget. Congress needs to learn how to balance a budget."
Yes. But you are side-stepping the tricky question. What would you have cut exactly at the time that the recession hit?
Originally posted by utherpendragon Unemployment benefits are given out by the states. 26 weeks I believe. The Feds jumped in and extended it to 90 something weeks ( I forget exactly how many).
The "stimulus" bill. We were sold on the idea (I am paraphrasing) "if we don't act now unemployment could hit 8%". What are we at now?
The bail outs.
cash for clunkers,etc.
The spending nee ...[text shortened]... . The bank (taxpayers) are on a budget. Congress needs to learn how to balance a budget."
Originally posted by FMF Yes, but as you say - that's something you wouldn't have cut. So what exactly would you have cut as the recession was biting hard?
Apparently you are not reading along. How about Spending for starters.
Federal Spending up 16 %
02 Sep '10 00:18
Back to Top