|
|
Bodo
House Bee

Offline
Posts: 81
Location: Crawfordville, FL
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2009, 11:06:00 PM » |
|
The CBO said that the spending was un-sustainable. Time for govt to return to a smaller, more sustainable and more proper size.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
buzzbee
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2009, 10:55:13 AM » |
|
Proving once again,the government can't tax and spend it's way to prosperity.Someone has to pay the bill.It always seems so easy to leave it to the next generation. People should soon start thinking again about what kind of inflation and tax rates they are creating for the next generations.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brian D. Bray
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2009, 06:10:07 PM » |
|
I think the next Constitutional amendment should require a federal balanced budget except in the case of Declared War. Declared War being one in which Congress has taken the time to pass the necessary legislation. Undeclared wars and Presidential (police) actions should have a 90 day time limit. That would preclude such things as Iraq.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is a school. What have you learned?  The greatest danger to our society is apathy, vote in every election!
|
|
|
dragonfly
House Bee

Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 468
Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2009, 10:48:44 PM » |
|
I think the next Constitutional amendment should require a federal balanced budget except in the case of Declared War.
I agree, and I believe that term limits would greatly help keep spending in control, because the same ole politicians would not be afforded the luxury of making promises every campaign over a 30-40 year time span. Once they get deeply entrenched, they learn how the machine runs and how to manipulate it. The question that stays in the back of my mind is what is going to happen when China says no?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brian D. Bray
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2009, 11:18:49 PM » |
|
I think the next Constitutional amendment should require a federal balanced budget except in the case of Declared War.
I agree, and I believe that term limits would greatly help keep spending in control, because the same ole politicians would not be afforded the luxury of making promises every campaign over a 30-40 year time span. Once they get deeply entrenched, they learn how the machine runs and how to manipulate it. The question that stays in the back of my mind is what is going to happen when China says no?They already have. Yesterday they told the USA they weren't going to buy anymore debt. That means the ability to function on a deficit spending just got a lot harder and eventually it will come down to the Treasury buying from the Fed and the Fed buying from the Treasury, or visa versa. That kind of number crunching will really boggle the mind of our accountants.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is a school. What have you learned?  The greatest danger to our society is apathy, vote in every election!
|
|
|
dragonfly
House Bee

Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 468
Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2009, 11:41:28 PM » |
|
[quote author The question that stays in the back of my mind is what is going to happen when China says no?[/quote] They already have. Yesterday they told the USA they weren't going to buy anymore debt. That means the ability to function on a deficit spending just got a lot harder and eventually it will come down to the Treasury buying from the Fed and the Fed buying from the Treasury, or visa versa. That kind of number crunching will really boggle the mind of our accountants. [/quote] Seriously?  I had to work today, so I was not able to keep up with much in the news. I'm shocked that it would happen this soon. If that's the case, hyper-inflation, here we come.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kathyp
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2009, 12:20:56 PM » |
|
my gut reaction to term limits is that it takes responsibility from the voter. of course, i think the majority of the voters are irresponsible anyway. they don't take the time to know issues before they vote.
i have long thought that time limits would work better. there is no good reason for congress to sit in washington the majority of the year. when they are there, they seem to feel obliged to do stuff. doing stuff means making laws and spending money. there are very few things that they are constitutionally responsible to do. they could easily execute those duties in 3 months. pay them the same amount of money, let them keep their health care, etc. take away their ability to travel, eat, and meet at taxpayer expense. make them spend the majority of their time at home with the people they were elected to represent.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body, no matter whether of the autocrats of Russia or France, or of the aristocrats of a Venetian Senate." --Thomas Jefferson to Joseph C. Cabell, 1816.
|
|
|
|
Brian D. Bray
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2009, 01:21:37 AM » |
|
Our founding fathers never invisioned a fulltime legislature. I say we need a constitutional amendment that limits Congress to 160 days during years of a Presidential election and 90 days the years. Idle hands create legal chaos with a fulltime legislature.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is a school. What have you learned?  The greatest danger to our society is apathy, vote in every election!
|
|
|
dragonfly
House Bee

Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 468
Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2009, 09:59:49 AM » |
|
my gut reaction to term limits is that it takes responsibility from the voter. of course, i think the majority of the voters are irresponsible anyway. they don't take the time to know issues before they vote.
We have such a huge number of voters nowadays that vote solely based on which candidate promises to give them something- usually money- that our system has become corrupted. I don't think that time limits on politicians would effectively fix that problem. We have all seen how much money a congress and president can spend in a short period of time since January. The reason I think that term limits would be more effective is that the good ole boys network would be interrupted and the politicians would not spend their entire time in office making sure that they spend the money on the right people with re-election being their sole purpose for actions while in office.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kathyp
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2009, 11:54:58 AM » |
|
We have all seen how much money a congress and president can spend in a short period of time since January. The reason I think that term limits would be more effective is that the good ole boys network would be interrupted and the politicians would not spend their entire time in office making sure that they spend the money on the right people with re-election being their sole purpose for actions while in office. good points. i guess i always rebel against legislating what should be common sense. maybe we could do both?? 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body, no matter whether of the autocrats of Russia or France, or of the aristocrats of a Venetian Senate." --Thomas Jefferson to Joseph C. Cabell, 1816.
|
|
|
dragonfly
House Bee

Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 468
Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2009, 12:43:01 PM » |
|
Common sense seems to be a rare commodity these days.  I always have the impulse to rebel against legislating what should be common sense as well. It's torqued me when they passed seatbelt laws and helmet laws. I figure if you don't have the right to be stupid, then the battle is lost.  (just kidding, sort of  )
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dragonfly
House Bee

Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 468
Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2009, 09:31:00 PM » |
|
Time for an update. I heard on a news program today that it's 157 billion per week, not 150 billion per month that we are borrowing. Also, the word is that the number of institutions and countries that will loan money to us has shrunk from 40 to 16, and these are primarily in the Middle East. Perhaps that is why the prez has been playing kissy-face on his world tour time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|