Questions for luciano and Obama supporters

Are the following statements "true" or "false":

1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

Grim17 wrote:Are the following statements "true" or "false":

1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

Like you friggin republicans have an answer. Bitch, bitch, bitch. That is all you can do. No goddamned solutions.
You friggin right wingers are about as useful as a tit on a bull.

I would like to see the democrats work with your side. Though you need to offer a solution, instead of just bitching.

Well like that will ever happen.

I'd like to see either side do something other than bitch about the other side, to be honest. I mean.. something worth a damn. Never gonna happen though.

Theophilus wrote:

Grim17 wrote:Are the following statements "true" or "false":

1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

Like you friggin republicans have an answer. Bitch, bitch, bitch. That is all you can do. No goddamned solutions.
You friggin right wingers are about as useful as a tit on a bull.

I would like to see the democrats work with your side. Though you need to offer a solution, instead of just bitching.

Well like that will ever happen.

I don't see any answers in your response... Just insults.

Nothing new there... Liberal is, as liberal does.

CarolinaHound wrote:I'd like to see either side do something other than bitch about the other side, to be honest. I mean.. something worth a damn. Never gonna happen though.

Hound, you hit the nail on the head. Im sick of the name calling, vote one party in and then the other side spends 4 years fighting against the other. Sounds like a great way to solve problems. There is NO common sense anymore.

Terry05_99 wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:I'd like to see either side do something other than bitch about the other side, to be honest. I mean.. something worth a damn. Never gonna happen though.

Hound, you hit the nail on the head. Im sick of the name calling, vote one party in and then the other side spends 4 years fighting against the other. Sounds like a great way to solve problems. There is NO common sense anymore.

Only politics Terry.

Im not gonna play this game Grim, Im gonna "slither" away like the "liberal" I am. Im heading to get breakfast then to the gun range with my "liberal" pals.

Truthfully I dont think I can answer any of your questions True or False the way you got them written.

luciano wrote:

Terry05_99 wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:I'd like to see either side do something other than bitch about the other side, to be honest. I mean.. something worth a damn. Never gonna happen though.

Hound, you hit the nail on the head. Im sick of the name calling, vote one party in and then the other side spends 4 years fighting against the other. Sounds like a great way to solve problems. There is NO common sense anymore.

Only politics Terry.

Im not gonna play this game Grim, Im gonna "slither" away like the "liberal" I am. Im heading to get breakfast then to the gun range with my "liberal" pals.

Truthfully I dont think I can answer any of your questions True or False the way you got them written.

They are simple true or false questions, that you are free to add a comment to.

In fact, I really don't expect that anybody who supports Obama will answer them, just as they refused to examine who Obama was during the campaign. I had hoped you were different luciano.

You insulted me and fellow conservatives and when called on it, you refused to back up your words.

You proudly proclaim that you believe in Obama's plans, but aren't willing to really look at those plans. You instead attack anyone who dares question them.

I pride myself on my judgment of people, and if this is who you really are, then I must admit that I was wrong. I considered you a friend from our days on Scams, because I though you had integrity and were an honest man.

Your refusal to examine the man you publicly endorse, is very disappointing.

I thought I'd take a poke at this & see what happens

Grim17 wrote:
Are the following statements "true" or "false":

Grim17 wrote:
1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

true

Grim17 wrote:
2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

false... I haven't seen anything come my way.

Grim17 wrote:
3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

false... you can't lower a deficiet budget by adding spending programs.

Grim17 wrote:
4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

I listed the preceeding as false, but selection "d" is what will take place.

Grim17 wrote:
5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

true

Grim17 wrote:
6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

true... which will negatively effect the economy.

BTW... I did not vote for Obama OR McCain

PaulM wrote:I thought I'd take a poke at this & see what happens

Grim17 wrote:
Are the following statements "true" or "false":

Grim17 wrote:
1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

true

Grim17 wrote:
2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

false... I haven't seen anything come my way.

Grim17 wrote:
3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

false... you can't lower a deficiet budget by adding spending programs.

Grim17 wrote:
4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

I listed the preceeding as false, but selection "d" is what will take place.

Grim17 wrote:
5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

true

Grim17 wrote:
6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

true... which will negatively effect the economy.

BTW... I did not vote for Obama OR McCain

I have gone over all of these very carefully and I really don't believe that I am saying this but I honestly agree with all of pauls answers. and I did not vote for either of them either. It seems like obama has all of the right answers but they are for all of the wrong questions.

Old Timer wrote:

PaulM wrote:I thought I'd take a poke at this & see what happens

Grim17 wrote:
Are the following statements "true" or "false":

Grim17 wrote:
1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

true

Grim17 wrote:
2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

false... I haven't seen anything come my way.

Grim17 wrote:
3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

false... you can't lower a deficiet budget by adding spending programs.

Grim17 wrote:
4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

I listed the preceeding as false, but selection "d" is what will take place.

Grim17 wrote:
5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

true

Grim17 wrote:
6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

true... which will negatively effect the economy.

BTW... I did not vote for Obama OR McCain

I have gone over all of these very carefully and I really don't believe that I am saying this but I honestly agree with all of pauls answers. and I did not vote for either of them either. It seems like obama has all of the right answers but they are for all of the wrong questions.

Yep. Paul answered same as I would, except for number 5. I would have interjected that there no potential about it, it WILL cause hyper-inflation.

Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Kazza wrote:Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Not sure exactly how much control he has over it. It's about like all things, he can't act without approval of the other two houses of government and they can't act without the president's, supposedly. But when you have a democrat as prez, and both houses are controlled by dems; or the situation can be reversed and be mostly reps; anyway, when you have one party controlling everything the prez pretty much gets what he wants. That's why I think it should be mandatory to have three representatives from each state, one for each party.

CarolinaHound wrote:

Kazza wrote:Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Not sure exactly how much control he has over it. It's about like all things, he can't act without approval of the other two houses of government and they can't act without the president's, supposedly. But when you have a democrat as prez, and both houses are controlled by dems; or the situation can be reversed and be mostly reps; anyway, when you have one party controlling everything the prez pretty much gets what he wants. That's why I think it should be mandatory to have three representatives from each state, one for each party.

You know that really does make sense. So it will probably never come to pass will it.

CarolinaHound wrote:

Kazza wrote:Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Not sure exactly how much control he has over it. It's about like all things, he can't act without approval of the other two houses of government and they can't act without the president's, supposedly. But when you have a democrat as prez, and both houses are controlled by dems; or the situation can be reversed and be mostly reps; anyway, when you have one party controlling everything the prez pretty much gets what he wants. That's why I think it should be mandatory to have three representatives from each state, one for each party.

But does either congress or the president have control over the federal reserve? In most countries, I thought, the central bank acts independantly to the government. They don't take orders from anyone, but have strict goals they try to accomplish and strict powers with which they can attempt to reach those goals - like in Germany, where the sole goal of the central bank is to limit inflation, nothing else matters.

Kazza wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Kazza wrote:Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Not sure exactly how much control he has over it. It's about like all things, he can't act without approval of the other two houses of government and they can't act without the president's, supposedly. But when you have a democrat as prez, and both houses are controlled by dems; or the situation can be reversed and be mostly reps; anyway, when you have one party controlling everything the prez pretty much gets what he wants. That's why I think it should be mandatory to have three representatives from each state, one for each party.

But does either congress or the president have control over the federal reserve? In most countries, I thought, the central bank acts independantly to the government. They don't take orders from anyone, but have strict goals they try to accomplish and strict powers with which they can attempt to reach those goals - like in Germany, where the sole goal of the central bank is to limit inflation, nothing else matters.

To the best of my knowledge, and that's not saying much, the national bank comes under the autority of the prez, congress, and the senate. Elsewise the prez and the congress would not of just told them to print up that trillion dollars a few days ago.

CarolinaHound wrote:

Kazza wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

Kazza wrote:Does Obama have any control over what the Federal Reserve does?

And what are your Federal Reserve's priorities? I know in Germany their one and only priority is to keep inflation under control (understandable), but I guess yours also balances that against unemployment?

Not sure exactly how much control he has over it. It's about like all things, he can't act without approval of the other two houses of government and they can't act without the president's, supposedly. But when you have a democrat as prez, and both houses are controlled by dems; or the situation can be reversed and be mostly reps; anyway, when you have one party controlling everything the prez pretty much gets what he wants. That's why I think it should be mandatory to have three representatives from each state, one for each party.

But does either congress or the president have control over the federal reserve? In most countries, I thought, the central bank acts independantly to the government. They don't take orders from anyone, but have strict goals they try to accomplish and strict powers with which they can attempt to reach those goals - like in Germany, where the sole goal of the central bank is to limit inflation, nothing else matters.

To the best of my knowledge, and that's not saying much, the national bank comes under the autority of the prez, congress, and the senate. Elsewise the prez and the congress would not of just told them to print up that trillion dollars a few days ago.

Wiki has this to say

As an independent institution, the Federal Reserve System has the authority to act on its own without prior approval from Congress or the President.[30] The members of its Board of Governors are appointed for long, staggered terms, limiting the influence of day-to-day political considerations.[31]

It's only wiki, so I don't know how accurate it is, but did congress tell the reserve to print that money or did they make that decision on their own? I haven't been reading the papers in that much detail on this.

Anyway, the reason I ask is that I would think that if the Federal Reserve acts independently of the President and of Congress, and if one of their goals is to limit inflation, then I wouldn't really be concerned about hyper-inflation due to them printing money. The guys running the reserve banks aren't usually politicians, and so they usually know what they're doing. In any case, they know a lot more about it than us, and I can't imagine they would ever run the risk of hyper-inflation. They're well aware of the consequences of printing too much money, even if the guys running the rest of the country aren't.

Either the prez and the congress told them too or "strongly suggested" that they do it or else. But like I said, I'm speaking out of my realm of knowledge as to who has control of the reserve.

Kazza wrote:Anyway, the reason I ask is that I would think that if the Federal Reserve acts independently of the President and of Congress, and if one of their goals is to limit inflation, then I wouldn't really be concerned about hyper-inflation due to them printing money. The guys running the reserve banks aren't usually politicians, and so they usually know what they're doing. In any case, they know a lot more about it than us, and I can't imagine they would ever run the risk of hyper-inflation. They're well aware of the consequences of printing too much money, even if the guys running the rest of the country aren't.

k, the us federal reserve is based on the fiat currency system and, by it's very nature, it is designed to fail; and, in fact, not only encourages inflation but creates it.

these are some valuable links that you should visit:
http://mises.org/Community/search/SearchResults.aspx?q=federal+reserve
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=9
http://www.google.com/custom?sa=Search&cof=LW%3A500%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2Flewroc1a.gif%3BLH%3A93%3BAH%3Acenter%3BAWFID%3A65dad07a461e3427%3B&domains=lewrockwell.com&q=federal+reserve&sitesearch=lewrockwell.com


this gives you a good idea of how the federal reserve works:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080228145758AAQTg2h

The Federal Reserve System is a congressionally-chartered agency like the USPS and NASA. It is organized with a 100% government agency at the top (the Board of Governors), and branches beneath them that resemble corporations.

The Board of Governors are all appointed for 14-year terms by the president and confirmed by congress. It operates per it's charter and laws set by congress. it is overseen by congress. There is no structure or mechanism for private ownership at this level; it is a government agency. Board members are forbidden by law to have any economic interest in a private bank. (Ref: Title 12 chapter 3 of the U.S. Legal Code). The Board determines monetary policy and provides high level oversight of the branches.

The 12 branches, however, are organized to involve member banks in the day-to-day operation. Member banks are required to buy shares in their branch. Each bank has one vote. The shares get a standard 6% dividend. They can vote for 6 of their 9 board members. All 'profit' from the Federal Reserve branches are turned over to the Treasury at the end of the year.

=== Re: the US government borrows notes from the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve does not make any direct loans to the government. That would be too much like the government printing money to pay for expenses. However, the Fed does buy T-Bills on the open market.

Let's review how the whole system works.

By law, all currency needs to be collateralized, i.e. backed by something of value. The collateral of choice is T-Bills.

When the Fed wants to increase the money supply, it buys T-Bills on the open market (from the public) using "thin air' money. No new government debt is incurred as this was previously issued debt.

The Fed does indeed collect interest on those T-Bills. However, the law says that all income after expenses must be turned over to the Treasury. So about 90%+ of the interest paid to the Fed is returned.

=== Re: The federal government then puts the money into circulation as its official currency?

If you accept the fact that the Federal Reserve System is the Government, then that would indeed be true.

=== Re: But what happens when the bill comes due? Do they have to sell more T-Bills to borrow more notes to pay the current debt?

Yes. When a T-Bill matures, the Treasury pays it off. But since the Fed needs to ensure currency is collateralized, the Fed will immediately replace the redeem T-Bill with another one. In essence, it becomes perpetual debt.

=== RE: And more importantly, where does the government get the money to pay the interest on the loan ?

taxes, just what it uses to pay for most of its expenses

=== Re: From what I understand, this is how the national debt got started?

No, there has been national debt long before the Federal Reserve.

National Debt is not created by the Federal Reserve. It is the result of deficit spending by congress.

If congress wanted to pay off the national debt, they would just have to balance the budget for 10 straight years since that how long it takes most T-Bills to mature.

I encourage you to do further research. Here are some links to help you get started
Source(s).

Note:I am not in concert with some of the links below, but you need to see every side and draw your own conclusions.

The Federal Reserve - Board of Governors site - http://www.federalreserve.gov/

A Federal Reserve site for educators - http://www.federalreserveeducation.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_reserve

Map of the branch locations - http://www.federalreserveonline.org/

FAQs - http://www.federalreserve.gov/faq.htm

How the Fed works - http://money.howstuffworks.com/fed.htm

***********************
EDITS for link corrections
and for this additon:
RE fiat currency:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fiatmoney.asp

Fiat Money
What Does It Mean?
Currency that a government has declared to be legal tender, despite the fact that it has no intrinsic value and is not backed by reserves. Historically, most currencies were based on physical commodities such as gold or silver, but fiat money is based solely on faith.

Investopedia explains Fiat Money
Most of the world's paper money is fiat money. Because fiat money is not linked to physical reserves, it risks becoming worthless due to hyperinflation. If people lose faith in a nation's paper currency, the money will no longer hold any value.

more on fiat currency:
http://www.rapidtrends.com/blog/what-does-fiat-money-mean/

Wow, kudos on your work HP! I'll be digging into that for awhile. I imagine if it's anything like tax codes, it's also set up so no one can understand it but them.

CarolinaHound wrote:Wow, kudos on your work HP! I'll be digging into that for awhile. I imagine if it's anything like tax codes, it's also set up so no one can understand it but them.

thanks, doggieboy. you will have no trouble understanding the bogus federal reserve. this is something that i have a keen interest in and keep close tabs on and, to be honest with you, the fact that it is so transparent makes it almost scary that it is still in existence.

Thanks for the info HP. I'm aware of the way the monetary system works, every developed country does the same thing, as far as I'm aware. I agree it's flawed, but then I think it's a bit like Democracy - it's the worst form of government there is, besides all the others. I don't know of any country using something other than the fiat currency system that has achieved any sort of economic growth.

I'm really wondering just how much real influence congress has over the decisions the Fed makes. Ben Bernanke was appointed in 2006, so I don't know whether it was Bush that made that decision, or a democrat-led congress, but can Obama really push him to make a decision one way or another?

Kazza wrote:Thanks for the info HP. I'm aware of the way the monetary system works, every developed country does the same thing, as far as I'm aware. I agree it's flawed, but then I think it's a bit like Democracy - it's the worst form of government there is, besides all the others. I don't know of any country using something other than the fiat currency system that has achieved any sort of economic growth.

I'm really wondering just how much real influence congress has over the decisions the Fed makes. Ben Bernanke was appointed in 2006, so I don't know whether it was Bush that made that decision, or a democrat-led congress, but can Obama really push him to make a decision one way or another?

if you want to find a country that achieved economic growth without central banking and fiat currency look no further than America, post-revolutionary times to 1913, without central banking and fiat currency.
Our Republic worked brilliantly before the central bank in 1913 and before the income tax in approximately 1913. then, to save the day, fiat currency came into effect (post bretton-woods 1970's) and now that's collapsing so the question is: now what?

the answer to your final/obama question is no.

Grim17 wrote:Are the following statements "true" or "false":

1. Obama is responsible for a budget deficit that's approximately 4 times greater than any budget deficit in US history.

2. Obama has said that his stimulus package, tarp and budget are designed to (among other things) bail out the financial sector, stimulate the economy, create and save American jobs, along with providing economic relief to middle and lower income families.

3. Obama and House democrats this week, insisted that despite record government spending and huge national deficits, the presidents budget will include and/or protect his 5 priorities:
a) Health Care - a national health care program
b) Energy - a Cap & Trade policy and alternative energy programs.
c) Education - More public school programs
d) Tax Relief - Aimed at the middle class and below
e) Deficit - Cutting the budget deficit in half in 4 years.

4. Assuming the above is true, to pay for all this deficit spending, the government can:
a) Borrow the money from foreign sources by getting countries like China to purchase interest bearing treasury bonds.
b) Have the Federal Reserve print more money.
c) Substantially raise taxes across the board.
d) Any or all of the above.

5. Introducing more money into the system from the Federal Reserve, de-values the dollar, which in turn results in inflation (higher prices for goods), and has the potential to cause hyper-inflation and collapse the US economy.

6. Obama has stated he will raise corporate taxes on both big and small businesses, and raise taxes on upper income families.

Actually, as far as I can see, all of the above are true.

I asked these questions for luciano, so he would acknowledge a few things before I laid out some facts that would blow his faith in the Messiah out the window. Either that, or would prove he is actually the one who is partisan.

Now lets examine a few facts pertaining to each question:

1. It is Obama, not Bush who is authorizing all this government spending. The downturn in the economy, which is mainly due to the banks having so many loans that people aren't paying, is the main cause of our economic problems. That is neither Bush's fault, nor Obama's. How to address this problem is up to the president, and we all know what Obama's solution is... To spend money we don't have.

2. Those are goals stated by Obama on many occasions, and whether any one person has seen any effects from these policies, is irrelevant.

3. This is from an article from the Associated Press last Wednesday, after Obama had visited the capitol:

"This budget will protect President Obama's priorities — education, energy, health care, middle class tax relief and cut the deficit in half," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said after the chief executive met privately in the Capitol with rank-and-file Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090325/ap_on_go_co/congress_budget

The Congressional Budget Office stated in a report a few weeks back, that Obama's budget figures are way off. They underestimate the costs of his social programs, and base their figures on very unrealistic economic growth figures.

Now lets look at those 5:

a) From the thread "Obama's fuzzy math:

"...his budget allocates a $634 billion "placeholder" for that purpose. The consensus opinion, though, is that the lowest possible cost of universal health care is $1.2 trillion, with many estimating closer to $1.5 trillion. So team Obama is off by roughly $600 billion over ten years to cover all of America's uninsured."

b) This is also from the "fuzzy math" thread:

"Jason Furman, the deputy director of the president's National Economic Council, says the cost is likely to be "two to three times higher" than the $646 billion estimate in the president's budget."

And then there is the fact, that the average American family will pay $60 to $120 more per month for electricity when Obama enacts his "Cap & Trade" program.

c) Watch the following report from the ABC program "Bailouts & Bull" about some of the education programs Obama is proposing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K93hZbWB_I

d) His tax relief has already been approved. I think it will add an extra $13 bucks a week for the average family. Doesn't sound like it will make much difference to me, but who knows. Obama doesn't talk about the fact that he will also raise taxes on businesses and upper income families, as part of that tax package.

e) The CBO report, stated that Obama can't possibly cut the deficit down to the levels he has promised. By CBO’s calculation, Obama’s budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019. Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama’s policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level. In fact, White House budget chief Peter Orszag said concerning the CBO report that:

“Deficits in the, let’s say, 5 percent of GDP range would lead to rising debt-to-GDP ratios that would ultimately not be sustainable,”

So there you have it... Obama's CBO, his own budget chief, and the deputy director of the president's National Economic Council have all come forward and stated that Obama's numbers are not good.

Still think that I'm "attacking" the president based on partisanship luciano?

Moving on...

4. Lets look at the three ways that Obama and the government can attack this massive deficit.

a) The selling of US Treasury bonds has been going on for a very long time, but all the indicators say that it's coming to an end very soon. Chinese diplomats and bank heads, have been displaying doubts publicly about the spending that Obama is doing, and have indicated that their purchases of our bonds may be coming to an end very soon. They are now proposing that the dollar be replaced as the worlds primary currency, and have proposed replacing it with something else. If all of this comes to pass, it would be devastating to the US.

b) The Fed has already authorized the printing of $1.2 trillion extra dollars, which is designed to keep the US from sinking into a DEPRESSION.

c) If Obama chooses to raise taxes, I don't think I need to explain how this will negatively effect the country... Do I?

5. This is considered to be a last ditch effort to save the American economy, and if this fails, there is nothing more that can be done, and our economy will collapse. This move by the Fed, has been tried many time in other countries in the world, and has never been sucsessful... NEVER. In theory, we can actually sink into a depression, and experience hyper-inflation due to this move. What that means is, it could cost hundreds, maybe even thousands of dollars to purchase a loaf of bread.

6. Any economist will tell you, that you should never raise taxes during a recession. Everyone knows, that when you raise taxes on Business, they pass that tax on to the consumer in the way of higher prices. Either that, or they end up laying off workers. Either one of those has a negative effect on the middle and lower class families in America. Does this sound like a plan that will help or hurt the average American?

****************************

Now luciano, please address these issues and tell me again how you have faith in the Messiah's plans for this country. Tell me some more, about how "partisan" and "un-patriotic" I'm being. Then to top it off, why don't you blame Bush some more, and tell me how everything I just posted was nothing more than republican lies.

The ball is in your court pal.

Kazza wrote:I'm really wondering just how much real influence congress has over the decisions the Fed makes. Ben Bernanke was appointed in 2006, so I don't know whether it was Bush that made that decision, or a democrat-led congress, but can Obama really push him to make a decision one way or another?

hi kazza....

the prez can't force the fed to act, but i think bernanke is certainly aware of what's on obama's mind.

here ya go... take a look at this March 15, 2009 airing of CBS "60 minutes" where bernanke explains who, what, when about the federal reserve. quite amazing actually:

In a rare interview with a sitting Federal Reserve chairman, the first in 20 years, Ben Bernanke tells Scott Pelley what went wrong with America's financial system.

Part 1