No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt your
"conservative" president gave you.

Dennis

Paddlec1 wrote:
No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.


It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Unlike you, I don't see the world as "doom and gloom" or hopeless and I
reject your pathethic "message".

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt your
"conservative" president gave you.

As usual, you're wrong. Yes, the debt ceiling has been raised, but most
of the debt existed before Bush took office.

"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message
...
Paddlec1 wrote:
No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.


It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Unlike you, I don't see the world as "doom and gloom" or hopeless and I
reject your pathethic "message".

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt your
"conservative" president gave you.

As usual, you're wrong. Yes, the debt ceiling has been raised, but most of
the debt existed before Bush took office.

That may depend on which Bush you are referring to.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

BTW: Here are some numbers.

Date Amount

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/28/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/29/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

So we see that, when Bush took office in 2000, the debt was already 5.6
trillion. And in 4 years, he has escalated it by 1.8 trillion. The last time
the debt was escalated by that amount was from the previous 9 years, from
1991 until 2000. And the last time it escalated by 1.8 trillion before that
was from before this data. So even if Bush 'inherited' the debt, 87% of it
is from Bush Sr, Reagan and Bush Jr. 33% of it is from Junior alone, so far.

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel. Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

--riverman

riverman wrote:

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel. Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

Using logarithmic scale (2nd graph) the largest increase in federal debt
occurred after (not during!) the Civil War. I have never heard this before.
Was it due to the high costs of Reconstruction?

And contrary to those who say "debt was worse during WW2" note that
per-capita debt is much higher now. It had started to decline a bit
during the Clinton era.

From a river-runner's perspective, I suppose the best thing about this
is that the Feds won't be able to afford Auburn Dam now!

I love graphs.

"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message ...
riverman wrote:

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel. Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

Using logarithmic scale (2nd graph) the largest increase in federal debt
occurred after (not during!) the Civil War. I have never heard this
before.
Was it due to the high costs of Reconstruction?

Or else its just a bookkeeping artifact from the debt of the South being
added to the coffers? I won't pretend to know for real.


And contrary to those who say "debt was worse during WW2" note that
per-capita debt is much higher now. It had started to decline a bit
during the Clinton era.

From a river-runner's perspective, I suppose the best thing about this
is that the Feds won't be able to afford Auburn Dam now!

I love graphs.

Me too, but I don't fully understand the economics behind the numbers. I
hear folks talk about how the Natl Debt is a bad thing, other folks say its
an either-way kind of thing, and still others say that its actually a
healthy, even highly desirable thing. Beats me...I think its like personal
debt: the guy with all the toys has all the debt, and will tell you right up
to foreclosure day just how great debt is. If foreclosure day never comes,
he wins. If it does, then he probably has all sorts of twists and turns to
play the numbers and get away unscathed. It probably means that he was right
all along, and that debt is a good thing, but it makes me worried,
especially in times of huge financial upheavals, as that means we are in
waters without precendent, and no one can rightfully claim to have
experience in what is the right thing to do. With the dollar at an all-time
low (all recent time, anyway) against foreign currencies, and with the
petro-dollar vs. euro-dollar skirmishes going on, as well as this expensive
and endless war and the lack of US sympathies in some other major players, I
think we gotta just hold on to our assets and see what happens.

--riverman

Financial upheavals - just another excuse to use to get better camping and
boating gear - it's a hedge against inflation - Honest dear, Really.....

A really, really good paddle appreciates - right?


Ken

"riverman" wrote in message
...

"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message
...
riverman wrote:

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel.
Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

Using logarithmic scale (2nd graph) the largest increase in federal debt
occurred after (not during!) the Civil War. I have never heard this
before.
Was it due to the high costs of Reconstruction?

Or else its just a bookkeeping artifact from the debt of the South being
added to the coffers? I won't pretend to know for real.


And contrary to those who say "debt was worse during WW2" note that
per-capita debt is much higher now. It had started to decline a bit
during the Clinton era.

From a river-runner's perspective, I suppose the best thing about this
is that the Feds won't be able to afford Auburn Dam now!

I love graphs.

Me too, but I don't fully understand the economics behind the numbers. I
hear folks talk about how the Natl Debt is a bad thing, other folks say
its
an either-way kind of thing, and still others say that its actually a
healthy, even highly desirable thing. Beats me...I think its like personal
debt: the guy with all the toys has all the debt, and will tell you right
up
to foreclosure day just how great debt is. If foreclosure day never comes,
he wins. If it does, then he probably has all sorts of twists and turns to
play the numbers and get away unscathed. It probably means that he was
right
all along, and that debt is a good thing, but it makes me worried,
especially in times of huge financial upheavals, as that means we are in
waters without precendent, and no one can rightfully claim to have
experience in what is the right thing to do. With the dollar at an
all-time
low (all recent time, anyway) against foreign currencies, and with the
petro-dollar vs. euro-dollar skirmishes going on, as well as this
expensive
and endless war and the lack of US sympathies in some other major players,
I
think we gotta just hold on to our assets and see what happens.

--riverman

In article , Paddlec1
wrote:

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt...

Not a problem, unless you live in Germany, France, Russia, Canada,
Australia, New Zealand, etc. Ah, that must be your problem.

Subject: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!!
__________==___
From: Warren
Date: 11/28/04 6:33 PM Mountain Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Paddlec1
wrote:

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt...

Not a problem, unless you live in Germany, France, Russia, Canada,
Australia, New Zealand, etc. Ah, that must be your problem.

Let's see, Germany, France, Russia, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are in
trouble because of the 8 trillion $ US debt.
Nice fantasy you have going there Warren.

Dennis