boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

I think that you simply can't read. I said that Trump shares part of the blame. And if he did not sign those bills, and there was a government shutdown, you would be the first one to blame Trump for the shutdown. You can't have it both ways. In your mind if Trump signs those bills he is wrong and if he does't sign those bills he is wrong. Heads I win Tails you lose

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

It is not in dispute that Obama increased the debt by 74%. That is a fact.
The post, as I read it, appropriately concerned the current situation "spending our way to failure as a nation"--- two years into Trump's administration. From a fiscal responsible party, and a President who despite promising to eliminate the national debt as a candidate, and who is now projected to add $5.08 trillion inches in his first term, and subsequently add $9.1 trillion in his second term; we should all be fearful.
There is also the added element of how the money is spent.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

In this case we essentially agree. WE need a balanced budget. in this sence congress and Trump had better get it done.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Good.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Well I find it quite odd that you folks were so outraged by Trump's calling out NATO member states for relying to heavily on the US taxpayer for their defense yet you want to cut military budgets in the face of a rising China who has the stated goal of becoming the worlds premiere super power.

Interest on debt will soon become a larger line on the budget than Military spending and I am not so sure that Social Security is actually paying for itself, a couple of years ago it was not, but then there has been economic expansion under Trump so it may not currently be underwater but no matter, unless there are changes it soon will be and it will go through the so called "Trust Fund" in as quick as a decade. That Trust fund does not exist by the way other than an accounting notation on the federal budget, there is no money there.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Where do you get the $9.1 trillion figure from? I have not seen anything like that anywhere.

Trump is not really a republican anymore than Sanders is a democrat, both men have chosen the major parties to run under as to do otherwise would preclude their successful bid.

I have always said that it would be great to have a 2 term president who would rather than concentrate on new big ambitious spending programs would do nothing more than focus on waste and fraud in federal spending, duplication of services, unnecessary services and spending that would result in a much more streamlined federal system that was efficient and responsible with tax payer dollars. Unfortunately you and I both know that neither party has any ambitions towards that goal, we the taxpayers are just suckers being taken for a ride.

I do find it curious that the democrats are making noise about spending, I can guarantee that were the democrats in power there would be even more spending and even fewer calls for accountability coming from your side. I would also guarantee increased taxation and a much slower economy, we would probably already be in recession.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Both sides have their hands in the cookie jar. It is far easier to cut taxes and increase spending than it is to raise taxes and cut spending. Therefore, we are all responsible in that we will punish politicians who do the latter and re-elect politicians who do the former.

It is interesting and oh so predictable that the right wingers here seem to think that social entitlements are the only problem (side note--if you have paid into SS your entire working life then you are indeed "entitled" to benefits promised. The right wing has managed to make entitlement a pejorative as in"give away" or "free stuff". Let's return "entitlement" to its actual meaning.).

I rarely see right wingers who will to talk about the defense budget whose
procurement process is arguably the most corrupt in all of government. There is a reason that the large defense contractors have production facilities in key congressional districts all over the country. This is how the second largest air force on the planet is the US Navy and the Pentagon has defense projects pushed on them that they neither want nor need.

Before we start talking about cutting SS (which does not contribute to the deficit, BTW) lets try two ideas that I have mentioned here before:

1. Any Congress Critter is forced to recuse him/herself from v****g on any defense appropriations bill that would benefit his/her own district. This would go a long way towards a rational analysis of what our defense needs actually are instead of a Congress Critter's self interest. It would also lead to more rational decision making by the defense contractors placing facilities where they economically make sense rather than to grease the wheels.

2. Any foreign military adventure comes with an automatic tax increase to pay for it. This would have stopped W's Iraq war in its tracks. Easy to be pro-war when it comes with a tax cut, right? That way, everyone in the country is investment in the war, even if it s as trivial as paying a few more bucks in taxes to actually "support the troops" instead of bumper stickers. This produces, and will always produce "rich man's war-poor man's fight". No more wars on the credit card affecting only the troops and their families.

Do these simple things and then discuss the social safety net.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

I have not heard much--either Democrats or Republicans---talking about this problem--maybe I am not reading the appropriate sources. It should be a concern for all Americans. The originator of this thread is not a Democrat, and he has legitimate concerns--as we all should. The $9.1 trillion figure is a projected number that I read in "the balance". It is projected and may be disputed. Only time will tell.
What is not questionable is that Trump's uneducated, ignorant, irresponsible promises of balancing the budget will not happen while he is President. The man made promises without a clue to real solutions--a balanced budget was one, health care was another.
Further, if one blames Obama for the increased national debt during his tenure, and not Congress; then one has to fairly blame Trump for an increased debt, and not Congress.

EyeSawYou

As well as Obama and GWB.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Trump will not balance the budget, there is no way he can do that especially with is ideas and push on infrastructure.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

What infrastructure? trump gave away that money to the rich.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

How about adjusting the caps on payroll taxes, I don't disagree with turning a critical eye towards defense spending, but I seriously doubt that simply taking an axe to it is the right answer either. You are right that currently the program is paying for itself but just barely, the most recent report shows it at basically break even, it also predicts that by 2035 it will be bankrupt.

There is so much that could be done with the federal government that would make sense but the politicians would never agree on anything, they are too entrenched in the support that they get from various factions, the left will never address civil service rules and the right will not address waste in defense spending, similar situations exist in pork and wasteful spending, both sides participate.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

That just shows your ignorance...

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

I am not talking about taking an axe to the defense budget as you suggest. I am talking about taking the self-dealing out of it. Only then can we have a rational discussion about defense needs. I suspect this will allow us to cut defense spending--perhaps substantially, but we won't really know until we can take the corruption out of the process. Here's another idea--We Support the Troops bumper stickers should cost 500 bucks with the money used for troop support services. That way, when when we see one of those stickers we will know that the person displaying it actually supports the troops and is not engaging in false patriotism on the cheap.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I think that every American agrees with you other than the defense contractors, I do have to wonder sometimes if the proceeds from those $500 hammers and toilet seats were not funding black ops. I also wonder if that is not why we fight wars from time to time to keep defense contractors in business, no wars no need for munitions.