U.S. to run first surplus since 2008: CBO

[Edward Kennedy]

This is good news, only one single month but good news anyways. I don't believe the next month will remain in balance, but we shall see

Better news would be obummer loses the election and the Republican victor reverses all the bs his predecessor passed.

[Smaug]

The U.S. owes 15 trillion dollars. At a 48 billion monthly payment, how many decades will it take to pay the mortgage?

[smallLliberal]

The U.S. owes 15 trillion dollars. At a 48 billion monthly payment, how many decades will it take to pay the mortgage?

A very, very long time.

However, it is really good news that the US has turned a corner on this matter. 4 years without a monthly surplus is a really bad thing.

[Faramir]

I don't believe it. This is electioneering. I ill wait for independent confirmation.

you dont believe the CBO?

you realize the GOP runs the show in the Congress?

besides, this is only one month and not an entire year

I am guessing that now they are are not spending billions flying around Iraq delivering ice cream to the troops, it has to figure in this ... "peace dividend" as Clinton would call it.

Good news if you ask me. I also read in the Globe today that auto production is nearly at full capacity and they will have to expand production soon.

Stop being so dishonest. You damn well know that military spending is only one factor in the defecits. Increased program spending more than out did any war spending.

[smallLliberal]

I don't believe it. This is electioneering. I ill wait for independent confirmation.

you dont believe the CBO?

you realize the GOP runs the show in the Congress?

besides, this is only one month and not an entire year

I am guessing that now they are are not spending billions flying around Iraq delivering ice cream to the troops, it has to figure in this ... "peace dividend" as Clinton would call it.

Good news if you ask me. I also read in the Globe today that auto production is nearly at full capacity and they will have to expand production soon.

Stop being so dishonest. You damn well know that military spending is only one factor in the defecits. Increased program spending more than out did any war spending.

I think that military spending is the 2nd biggest part of the US budget and was severely ramped up under Bush and still going up under Obama (up until recently anyways). So absolutely it is part of the problem and likely the biggest part of the problem. I read that Iraq cost the US 2 Trillion dollars and it is not done yet because of future VA costs.

Look at this chart.

[smallLliberal]

I think that chart is just the Defense department budget, so you have to add the special spending for the wars.

[Faramir]

I don't believe it. This is electioneering. I ill wait for independent confirmation.

you dont believe the CBO?

you realize the GOP runs the show in the Congress?

besides, this is only one month and not an entire year

I am guessing that now they are are not spending billions flying around Iraq delivering ice cream to the troops, it has to figure in this ... "peace dividend" as Clinton would call it.

Good news if you ask me. I also read in the Globe today that auto production is nearly at full capacity and they will have to expand production soon.

Stop being so dishonest. You damn well know that military spending is only one factor in the defecits. Increased program spending more than out did any war spending.

I think that military spending is the 2nd biggest part of the US budget and was severely ramped up under Bush and still going up under Obama (up until recently anyways). So absolutely it is part of the problem and likely the biggest part of the problem. I read that Iraq cost the US 2 Trillion dollars and it is not done yet because of future VA costs.

Look at this chart.

It's PART Of the problem. Even Bush's last budgets deficits were due MORE to program spending (such as his expansion into drug socialized care) than to military spending. All liberals want to believe if the military was cut they could balance the budget.

[smallLliberal]

You are not talking about me, I have a few ideas to cut social spending in the US.

I think government benefits should be "means tested". Somebody with 5 million (or pick your own number) in assets and/or income does not need the universal benefits. Plus, the US government should play hardball with the drug companies (like we do in Canada) and get the cost of drugs down.

So, there are two ways they could reduce social spending without hurting one single poor senior.

But, the military spending in the last decade are a significant part of the deficit and debt. Like I said earlier, the Iraq war alone is in the 2 trillion dollar range. A huge waste of money for an unneeded war.

[Hodgson]

It destroy Saddam's regime and unlocked freedom in MiddleEast.

2 trillion?

Meh.

[Faramir]

It destroy Saddam's regime and unlocked freedom in MiddleEast.

2 trillion?

Meh.

I will be the first to criticize GW Bush for his 400 million dollar war than became 2 trillion. The problem is many liberals want to write a revionist history where the war was the chief cause of the deficit. It wasn't and isn't. As we now see under Obama's massive deficits they have nothing to do with war spending.

I think the US should cut all departments, including defense. We need to really ask if spending more on military than all nations combined makes any sense.