U.S. debt picture is much gloomier than politicians have said

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 2:38 p.m.

    Barack made many promises before he was elected the first time. He promised we would be out of war in 6 months-they are negotiating how to keep troops in longer. He promised to close Gitmo-It's still open. He promised to heal the planet-The US has become a greater exporter of oil. He promised our taxes will not go up-they have. He promised we could keep our doctor-that turned out to be false. He called a white officer in Cambridge "acted stupidly" and "history of racism" to heal the nation-he was wrong. He rallied to defend Trayvon Martin, then walked away when crimes of black on white came to the forefront.

    Even his own base is unhappy with him. Yet they get locked in step and march to their leaders drums. No matter what. Can't use their own brains. But his base is made up of bottom dwellers whose only goal in life is to take as much as they can, and wait for the collapse of this once great nation.

    Last words. "The arguement that we are the richest country so therefore...." no longer is true. We are the most indebted nation(thatnotwealth)

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 7, 2012 1:20 p.m.

    For decades southern Europeans were lied to by their governments about their sovereign debt and not to worry. Then reality struck. Our course is hauntingly similar. Democrats and Republicans only face reality only when the other party is in power.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 9:49 p.m.

    Dick Cheney said 'Reagan showed that deficits don't matter'. The debt tripled under Reagan. It doubled under Bush. Republicans are no more responsible with our money than democrats.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 9:40 p.m.

    Republicans have no record of lower the deficit. Obama's spending was to prevent the economic catastrophe produced by GWB.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 5, 2012 8:26 p.m.

    @mountainman - since you have this all figured out, how well would the economy exactly would have done should we have, oh say, let 2 of the 3 auto manufactures gone out of business, that banks had been prevented from doing any lending because they were operating below their reserve rate, and little projects like the I15 projects not been funded..... what would the economic numbers be since you seem to have them... and can say with all confidence the stimulus funds had no effect.....

    You have those... right? You're not just relying on web blog blather, and talk radio non-senese. Were looking for some real solid data to back your claims.... you have those - right?

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 7:45 p.m.

    Money is debt, period. How come everybody argues about the debt as if something can change? Our monetary system is debt based and if no one is willing to change our monetary system then it is like a dog chasing its own tail.

  • David Centerville, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 6:07 p.m.

    Utahbluedevil: We are not talking about Clinton and the balanced budgets of the 1990s. We are talking about Obama and his presidency. He has failed to produce a budget that garnered a single vote in Congress in 2012. The Democratic Senate has failed to produce a budget in 4 years.

    The debt that Obama is creating is huge. How can you possible bring up Clinton and balanced budgets when we are not talking about anything remotely close to a balanced budget?

    To get balance we must have spending reductions and tax increases. Republicans have agreed to tax increases so long as Obama will get serious about reduced spending. But Obama won't write up anything dealing with spending reductions until after signing a bill to increase taxes. Sounds like Pelosi saying the ACA must be voted on first before it can be read to see what is inside.

    I don't believe Obama has any intention of reducing spending unless it hurts military, Wall Street and banks.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Dec. 5, 2012 1:56 p.m.

    The Obama stimulus brought the best recovery that never happened; the imaginary recovery all done with borrowed money!

  • BrentBot Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 1:35 p.m.

    Obama's not worried, because he plans on the Federal Reserve continuing their printing money out of thin air, to repay the debt with worthless dollars. Guess who pays for this? Retirees and prudent investors will lose their net worth as the dollar depreciates. Wiemar Republic in the U.S. is on the horizon. Remember the photos of Germans using wheelbarrows of money to pay for a loaf of bread, or their burning their currency to remain warm due to hyperinflation?

    The only solution for us to retain our net worth is to convert our savings and stocks to natural resources (gold, silver, copper, or oil).

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 1:05 p.m.

    @JoeBlow "Every dollar the govt. spends benefits someone."

    That may be true, but maybe some people should not benefit from american tax dollars. How many tens of millions (if not more) of tax payer dollars have found its way into the hands of corrupt foreign powers?

    On 9/10/2001 Donald Rumsfeld in a press conference informed us that the pentagon could not account for 2.3 trillion dollars in spending. The next day 9/11/2001 the american people had other things on their mind. And, President Bush allocated another 56 Billion dollars to defense spending.

    The US has got to get out of the war business. It is too costly in the lives of the young men and women that serve, too costly in spending, and too costly in the hate that it generates in other countries toward the US. If the american people had only heeded President Eisenhower's warning about the military industrial complex back in the 60's, the country might not be in the debt that it is today. For the sake of future generations, this generation needs to work on solving the problem.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 5, 2012 12:29 p.m.

    @mountianman...... you logic is mind bending. You assumption is that people who voted Democrat don't care about budget.... and yet the only President who has come remotely come close to having a balanced budget was....... drum roll...... a Democrat. We have lots of posturing, some tax cutting, but little actual saving any money.

    When it comes down to actual acts versus rhetoric...... there is next to no difference. nada. nothing.

    Oh, and those deficits the hit the books in Obama's first year..... ummmm...... those were all passed and authorized, yes, you got it, before the democrat from Chicago took offoce.

    But even it the case..... the USS America was taking on water.... was gong down... and yes, government was spending like crazy to keep her from going under. The torpedo his the USS America the end of 2006 - beginning of 2007. The ship was going down. What you accusing the Obama administration of is not turning off the pumps to save money. Lets put it this way - had we not continued to pump, the national debt would be the least or our worries now.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 12:25 p.m.

    I guess it's time to buy an Idaho Lottery ticket and or Publishing Clearing House grand prize entry and hope for the best. The odds are only...1-100 million but those odds seem better than what the future under liberal democrats projects.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 12:23 p.m.

    "The true tragedy for our future is that there are millions of uninformed Americans who will buy the political demagoguery and treachery that our problems can be solved by taxing the rich."

    This about says it all. On Nov 6 millions of Americans DID buy all of this demagoguery with eyes wide open ... and with elections come consequences. I have a sinking feeling we are setting on top of a a volcano ready to explode ... and most people are just kicking back enjoying the view!!

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 12:19 p.m.

    On November 6th 2012 the majority of the citizens of the United States of America voted with eyes wide open to "not care" about our debt. Whether the debt is 16 trillion or the projected 20 trillion in 4 more years of Obama spending it isn't a problem... according to the masses. So - for those who actually think and understand - how do you feel about 20 trillion in debt? How will this Mount Everest pile of Chinese debt largely effect your day to day life? Obama has convinced HIS followers that the debt is nothing to worry about and in fact his latest proposal was to increase that debt even deeper with more borrowed stimulus. Paul Ryan - House budget director - is telling quite a different story compared to Barack. Ryan has warned that this giant debt is going to sink this economy within 18 -24 months unless drastic changes are made. Ryan is talking about soaring interest rates resulting from lending rate changes that are set to kick in due to our debt and lack of confidence by our lenders. Obama isn't worried - the question is do you trust Barack? Your livelihood and future depends on the answer.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Dec. 5, 2012 11:38 a.m.

    The republican/democrat dictatorship's only solution is to increase spending in hopes the debt will decrease. Has that worked yet? When are they going to quit doing that?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 10:59 a.m.

    So if our debt is so bad... And tax increases are bad...

    Why is our governor going to receive a 37 percent pay increase?

    Where is his increase coming from? Aw yes, the wallets of taxpayers. Because... WE all have an endless amount of cash.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Dec. 5, 2012 10:57 a.m.

    @ happy valley. If the people cared about the threat of the national debt, they would not vote for a man who doesn't care either. It gets even worse, Obama wants authority to raise the national debt limit whenever he feels like it without congressional approval. Does that sound like a "leader" who cares about debt or the unavoidable consequences of it?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 10:29 a.m.

    Mountanman said: "Fact #3: He doesn't care and neither do those who support him!"

    ...Typing the word "fact" doesn't make it so, especially when it is so blatantly an opinion.

    This is a hugh problem of the fox entertainment folks, not understanding the difference between news and opinuendo.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Dec. 5, 2012 9:54 a.m.

    Not that it is surprising, but Williams loses all credibility when he (again) blatently ignores the real facts that the Dems are looking to make cuts as well as raise taxes.

    Just as raising taxes is not enough in and of itself to solve the problem, cutting government spending is not enough in and of itself to solve the problem - a balanced approach is needed.

  • SEY Sandy, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 9:46 a.m.

    I've mentioned this before, but it bears repeating: there is no way the government can meet its obligations. Any time the government can't meet its promises, it defaults on its obligation to one degree or another. It's not a question of whether there will be a default because it's already in the process of defaulting. Promises are not going to be kept.

    Williams is right when he says we are ignorant of the total amount of debt we face. The economist Lawrence Kotlikoff has estimated the total of our unfunded liabilities. Gary North expresses it this way:

    "The total obligation of the federal government to voters that is not funded at the present time is now $222 trillion. This does not mean that, over the entire life of the program, the government will be short $220 trillion. It means that the present value of the unfunded liability is $220 trillion. This means that the government would have to set aside $220 trillion immediately, invest this money in non-government projects that will pay a positive rate of return, and will therefore fund the amortization of this debt."

    This obligation cannot be met. There will be default. Plan accordingly.

  • SLC gal Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 9:23 a.m.

    If you want to help your children and grandchildren, teach them about investing, teach them about money, teach them how to be rich vs. being a bean counter. I think the American outlook would be much different if we taught the generations how to own a business instead of wroking at someone else's business (and running up huge college debt in the meantime for the privilage).

  • Red Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 8:41 a.m.

    America Voted for Obama.

    If it wasn't so painful it would be hilarious!

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Dec. 5, 2012 8:00 a.m.

    Fact #1: Barrack Obama has borrowed more money than all the other Presidents combined up until GWB's 5th month in office!
    Fact #2: He plans to continue to borrow even more as evidenced by his refusal to cut spending and increase entitlements!
    Fact #3: He doesn't care and neither do those who support him!
    Fact #4: This has weakened the strength of our dollar and is our nation's greatest threat!
    Fact #5: It will destroy our economy, wipe out your and my retirement savings and increase poverty!
    Fact #6: Obama and the Democrats will blame the Republicans and the news media will swear its true!

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Dec. 5, 2012 7:57 a.m.

    So, you've just made a case for raising taxes or the country will be destroyed. Not the usual conservative approach but whatever.

    Or we can just default and the south can split off like you "patriots" really want.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Dec. 5, 2012 7:01 a.m.

    Some dire problems in our future, and this article is calling for an honest look at the problems!? Washington will never go for that! Who will reelect politicians of any party when it's clear that the full picture of our nation's financial status has been systematically hidden from the public's awareness since Congress started collecting taxes?!

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 5, 2012 6:56 a.m.

    I would love to see how this 8 trillion dollar number is built since the entire premise of this that this is a given number... particularly when you speak of accruals Heck, the average family budget would never work if this same accrual method were leverage - we would all be huddling in the corner. So I would really like to see some pointers to how these numbers were built. The is a important or more so to understand then this scare you to death piece.

    For example, the often touted "debt per citizen" numbers. Pretty ominous sounding stuff. They are rolled out like at some point we will all be handed a bill where we are expected to pony up our portion. But when that number is spread over the life of a citizen - while still unpleasant - actually put in context and a lot less ominous.

    So lets play with full disclosure here. If we really are running at 8 trillion a year - lets see how it is built so we can tackle it.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Dec. 5, 2012 5:11 a.m.

    Yes, the Debt is our biggest national security issue.

    And I hope that the GOP is successful in pushing the Dems to make serious spending cuts along with some modest tax increases. It is time to put America over party.

    Every dollar the govt spends benefits someone. That is why both R and D are so quick to do it.
    (if you think this is a Democratic party problem, you are not paying attention)

    Why is it that Grover only included taxes in his plan? When you are only limited to tax cuts with no restraint on spending, you get the situation we are in.

    We need about a 3 to 1 spending cuts to tax increases.

    It can be done. FIND A WAY