US Debt Clock

[GlamisSandDuner]

This is a real eye opener for those of you who haven't seen this before.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[RAD4EVER]

Thought the Durst Family would add some type of active page to show it's Debt Clock.
Being they were big investors in land and buildings, doesn't surprise me that it's parent company was a New York Money Monster for the GOP.
What really cracks me up.....a lame "2001-2003" clock down for repairs change coincided with the biggest contributor towards the 11 Trillion dollar jump from 4 Trillion dollars.......the Bush War!
Sheesh
Rad

[Sandcock]

Stop looking back at Bush and start looking at Obama as he starts to handle the Afghan War like Vietnam, running it politically instead of listening to the Generals. I thought we learned something from that, but apparently not. Aside from the Dept of Defenses budget, it is the social piece of the pie that gets the majority of the money. Its the mishandling of it that is the crime. The mess we are in is a direct cause of bad lending practices and the politicians looking to take advantage of the situation to stay in power and become wealthy, and the capitalist corps coming on board to get some of the action after seeing the loaning banks and pols making out. We can point fingers of who's at fault, but that is the reason we are at where we are at recession wise. Now the banks have tightened their orifices and won't lend or make it harder to get a loan. We won't have to worry when China owns us, we'll all be equal.

[RAD4EVER]

Glad to hear from you too. How in the world did Vietnam get into this discussion? Since I was the first to respond to “Lame Debt Clock” posting, I guess there’s some discussion to your pointing to a GOP War 55 years ago.
First, it was than President Eisenhower’s staff suggestion to send “Military Advisors” knowing the French got their lunch handed to them and left with their tails dragging behind them. For whatever reason, the “Corporate Brass” talked him into more troops and money for fighting the North Vietnamese ½ million regulars and whatever battalions he wasn’t made aware of until too late, the U.S.A. was committed! Hence…Kennedy’s falling into the Militaries trap for continuing the now known Vietnam War! President Eisenhower’s knowing he had been duped by his own General Staff and Corporate supporters made his now famous “Last Radio Speech” warning the American public “Beware of the Industrial and Military complex” and such. Kennedy wasn’t going for it and got his brains splattered all over Dallas for his refusing to commit the USA into a prolong war.
Now we have a treasonous General playing politics! His playing for the GOP in it’s political war planning concerning 2012 elections here in 2009? Talk about giving comfort to the enemy?
Sandy, why don’t you folks get with the program rather then wave every catchy banner the GOP comes up with?
President Obama isn’t the reason with are in Afghanistan, it is still President Bush’s War legacy that we’re trying to part with. But…. nice try bring up a lame spin concerning the Vietnam/Afghanistan parallel!
All in all, ask your GOP Reps to come up with something new and stop crying over spilt milk!
See you folks at Glamis,
RAD4EVER

[Sandcock]

As I said its the Vietnam conflict all over again, LBJ waged the war politically, it appears that Obama is going down that road again. A military man will tell you if you are going to fight a war, fight it to win. The politics of the current state is going to cause more casualties and the finer in the air to see what way the wind is blowing is going to weaken us with rogue states like Iran. Obama needs to listen to the experts, i.e. the Generals.

Radster, the reason why we are on this topic because you always throw the blame at you know who

[Sloppyduner]

But really Sany C if you look at a time line that followed both aquired debt and spending you'd see a HUGE chunk of dept and spending happened under Bush. Ya its Obama problem now. And he even said that the previous president was no longer being held responsible. Looks to me like when the wife goes on a spree and the husband finds out and has to answer to the credit card companies.

As far as Vietnam and listening to Generals I think Obama would catch poo poo either way. How many generals did Bush go thru? Seemed if they didn't tell him (or Chaney) what they wanted to hear, they just found new ones. At least Obama isn't spending billions of dollars, killing and injuing soldiers trying to finish what his dad started in a country that had very little to do with the bigger picture. Neither seem(ed) to be doing the right thing in my opinion. but at least Obama took the fight to them where they are/were. Now from what I read they are on the run. Iraq was a quagmire since day one, it seemed. Now I'd say we're moving on.

As far as the Debt clock goes. We're screwed. We ARE owed by China. Our great grandkids will be owned by China. We need to come up with jobs jobs jobs. I blame the whole green movement. Seemed anything we were producing is no longer wanted because its bad for the enviroment. We gotta choose. poverty or enviroment.

[RAD4EVER]

As I said its the Vietnam conflict all over again, LBJ waged the war politically, it appears that Obama is going down that road again. A military man will tell you if you are going to fight a war, fight it to win. The politics of the current state is going to cause more casualties and the finer in the air to see what way the wind is blowing is going to weaken us with rogue states like Iran. Obama needs to listen to the experts, i.e. the Generals.

Radster, the reason why we are on this topic because you always throw the blame at you know who

Sandy....you can say it! [-o<
President Bush!
Now, wasn't that easy? =D> =D> =D>
Where are you guys camping for Halloween?
We need to "Beer UP"
RAD
GPS is ok with me!

[Sandcock]

I'll be out at Ocotillo Wells on Pole Line. I'm hoping to get to G a week or two before Thanksgiving.

I can say "Bush." I can say that he made mistakes, but to say that he and his administration is the root of it all is false. Without going into my positions as stated on all the other threads, there is culpability on both sides. With that said, I am one that looks at here and now, and what is in store for us in the future with the exception of looking back on lessons learned. The policies being made now are going to affect each and everyone from our freedoms being diminished and our wealth being taken. I don't like it and will continue to spout off. This transparency and most ethical thing is a joke. We are all being told what is best for us and when people actually see what is in the legislation and the fact that most pols haven't read and are just following party lines is bad for America no matter where you sit on the fence.

[RAD4EVER]

I'll be out at Ocotillo Wells on Pole Line. I'm hoping to get to G a week or two before Thanksgiving.

I can say "Bush." I can say that he made mistakes, but to say that he and his administration is the root of it all is false. Without going into my positions as stated on all the other threads, there is culpability on both sides. With that said, I am one that looks at here and now, and what is in store for us in the future with the exception of looking back on lessons learned. The policies being made now are going to affect each and everyone from our freedoms being diminished and our wealth being taken. I don't like it and will continue to spout off. This transparency and most ethical thing is a joke. We are all being told what is best for us and when people actually see what is in the legislation and the fact that most pols haven't read and are just following party lines is bad for America no matter where you sit on the fence.

Well put.
Anytime I need 5cc's of "Get Real" in the arm, your post seems to fulfill the need! President Bush's absence for Washington as far as I'm concern...thank God! Doesn't mean President Obama has my full support, but, has my support tackling the most horrible system in place to suck whatever resource left to us to survive on. Social Security, Wallstreet's raiding 401K'a,Super Pension Fund, CEO Billion Dollar paychecks and somehow stopping our slide into the worst depression this planet has ever suffered.
Sandy, we are at war here in the States.
We are at War with:
-Lack of simple education for first and sixth grade's in the poorest of cities
-Drugs has made a new surge into the middle class cause by depression
-Simple heath care for the poor overwhelming State run hospitals and clinics
-Families living on cup noodles in order to pay three times the amount mortgage/rent
-Every type of media hard pressed attack on the New President and his "African Family"
-New and dangerous White Skin Heads embedded in "Sport Sites" for the oblivious reasons.
Last and the most terrible war waged on American Citizens....lost of the most basic rights! The Right to express freethinking and the means to protect ourselves against Demigods at every level of Society.
SC, the 2 percent of Worlds population is bent on one thing and one thing only....keep the rabble stupid and poor so as to continue it's hold on wealth and power of life and death.
Rad4Eever
PS: If I'm able and if there is a empty chair around the campfire, would like to hook-up and talk SAND.
Now days, for a couple of hours, I get to roam the streets once or twice a month and looking forward to 5 days of riding and relaxation.

[Sandcock]

I blame the whole green movement.

sloppy that is one piece of the puzzle. Here are more pieces of the puzzle: taxation, labor laws, pay scales, and as you stated environmental pressures and constraints. We have become a service nation because small businesses have undue burdens placed on them from the government and large businesses are going to leave the country where they can take advantage, whether right or wrong, of cheap labor, no unions, no labor laws, no environmental constraints, etc. We, US citizens, share the guilt because we want to pay less for our goods. I don't even know if most of us can not get buy without some imported necessity Don't want to shed any light on the environmental movement because I think just as it is now, we will be importing any new environmental government imposed product at a high price. I think that the quality of life will go down for the middle class and poor as we go down this road. We are headed towards a government ran state. I don't like, but for some it may be the best thing since sliced cheese.

[Sloppyduner]

We are headed towards a government ran state.

Who runs the state now? If I remember right, In a democracy, "the people" run the government and the government runs the state.

[Sandcock]

they are supposed to listen to their constituents, i.e. the people who hired them.......they don't. For example, somewhere around 95% of the constituents that called Sen Feinstein to voice their opinion against the Stimulus were informed by Sen Feinstein that they didn't understand the issue. She went ahead and voted for it. I'm sure that the people that contacted her were of all classes and most did understand. Also, I listened to Rep Filner on a phone townhall meeting and he basically gaffed people off that opposed his idealogy. I'm sure you will find fault with the Republicans or those opposed to your point of view..........thats cool.

[Sloppyduner]

running it politically instead of listening to the Generals.

Sandy C Reading up on this General thing...heres a quote from General McChrystal
"We could do good things in Afghanistan for the next 100 years and fail, because we're doing a lot of good things and it just doesn't add up to success."

Seems even the General doesn't have a peachy outlook for things.

[Sandcock]

and now after making that statement the general has sized things up and has requested the amount of troops in what he thinks is the best course of action. Now mind you, he and his staff have made this assessment, i.e. it was not just him. I think he has a little more experience than Obama on the matters, but when it all comes down its political. And in my opinion, political moves cause casualties. Either remove our troops from the theater or take the general's advice.

[Sloppyduner]

Holy Geez!!! Now General McChrystal is saying 10,000 40,000 80,000 He likes the middle option better, but says Each option carries a high risk of failing. Sounds to me the same as building a sand car. You can put $10K, $40K or $80K into a car but you take it out and run it hard enough its has a risk of failing.

So now he's not sure a "troop surge" will do the trick?

[Sandcock]

What I have seen consistently reported is that he has requested 40,000 additional troops to complement what is in the theater at this time. Certain pols are speaking publicly for less. Where you getting you info from?

[Sloppyduner]

Where you getting you info from?

I first heard his quote on ABC. Looked to find it and THIS is the closest I found.

[MattV]

running it politically instead of listening to the Generals.

Sandy C Reading up on this General thing...heres a quote from General McChrystal
"We could do good things in Afghanistan for the next 100 years and fail, because we're doing a lot of good things and it just doesn't add up to success."

Seems even the General doesn't have a peachy outlook for things.

It sounds to me, that like most generals, General Mchrystal is a realist. Failure is always an option. Things can always go wrong. Even when you do everything perfectly, things can still go sideways. Afghanistan is a wonderfully strategic piece of real estate that would be very nice to have run by a pro-American, or at least neutral government. It's also important to remember that there is a very good reason that it has been referred to as the "Graveyard of Empires".

We have reached a point where a decision needs to be made about the future of our involvement there. It either needs to be a 100% commitment, or brought to an end. I know what my preference is, but I would be more comfortable with pulling out entirely than dithering about under politically driven ROE's with fewer people than are needed to tip the odds in favor of not allowing the failed state of Afghanistan to return to what it was prior to then end of 2001. The problem is, that as with most difficult decisions, the longer it takes to make, the less likely a preferred outcome is.

[Sandcock]

Air Force Times ............I'm having a hard time understanding that the Air Force Times would be dogging the General, but then I see that its an AP story which explains the negative slant. Wonder if their was an intentional leak, i.e.

They described it to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Once again politics be played while our troops are in harms way. Its all about Obama's positive global image.

[Sloppyduner]

OK so this thread started out with the Debt clock. Now it seems it has turned into putting more troops into battle, which will cost more money, in several different ways. What do we want the debt clock to slow down or "win" the war(s). What ever the heck "winning" is in this situation?

[MattV]

If the feds would stick to the things they are actually SUPPOSED to be doing, instead expanding their power and influence into every nook and cranny of our everyday lives, we could probably have both.

Perhaps it really would be a good idea to repeal the 16th amendment. If the money is taken away from them, they can't spend it.

[RAD4EVER]

OK so this thread started out with the Debt clock. Now it seems it has turned into putting more troops into battle, which will cost more money, in several different ways. What do we want the debt clock to slow down or "win" the war(s). What ever the heck "winning" is in this situation?

Sloppy, the only thing the Right is figuring, how to put The President in a bad light for 2012? Period! Troops have been suffering for the last 7 years for that very purpose...maintaining power! Nothing else.
President Bush and his "Advisers" knew the GOP was going into a dump! Now the Party is using Treasonous Turncoat General to push for more troops, fabricating a lame Vietnam scenario so as to push currant Administration into a No-Win position.
Well, from what I saw during the late evening news, Democrats in both houses... are not going for the trap! They will bring our soldiers back alive if they can? Baring any nonsense from 2012 GOP Presidential Election Committee!
RAD

[tomjeeps2]

Glade I'm not the only one tracking this, sources are quoting different numberer's but let's just call it $12 Trillion...TJ

http://zfacts.com/p/461.html

[tomjeeps2]

Congress raises debt ceiling to $12.4 trillion

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer Laurie Kellman, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 59 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Senate voted Thursday to raise the ceiling on the government debt to $12.4 trillion, a massive increase over the current limit and a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year.

The Senate's rare Christmas Eve vote, 60-39, follows House passage last week and raises the debt ceiling by $290 billion. The vote split mainly down party lines, with Democrats voting to raise the limit and Republicans voting against doing so. There was one defection on each side, by senators whose seats will be on the ballot next year: GOP Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio and Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana.

The bill permits the Treasury Department to issue enough bonds to fund the government's operations and programs until mid-February. The Senate will vote again on the issue Jan. 20.

Obama must sign the measure into law to prevent a market-rattling, first-ever default on U.S. obligations. The government piled up a record $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009 to counter a meltdown in financial markets and help bring the nation out of its worst recession in seven decades.

The early-morning vote followed the Senate's passage of a landmark bill to overhaul the nation's health care system. They were the Senate's last votes of the year.

With the exception of Voinovich, Republicans uniformly derided the bill, though they routinely supplied votes for eight previous increases totaling $5.4 trillion under President George W. Bush.

Voinovich, who is retiring, said he voted "yes" after Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed to consider amendments when the Senate takes up the matter again next month. Bayh told the Senate Budget Committee in November that he would oppose an increase in the limit unless Congress commits to a strict new debt-fighting plan.

Democrats had originally planned to pass an unprecedented increase of almost $2 trillion to avoid another vote before next year's midterm elections.

But that plan fell apart amid opposition from about a dozen Senate Democratic moderates, who refuse to support a debt limit increase unless it is accompanied by legislation to establish a new bipartisan task force to come up with a plan to curb the deficit. That idea is opposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other Democratic leaders.

Pelosi, meanwhile, is supporting demands of moderate House Democrats, who are demanding a "pay-as-you-go" budget law aimed at ensuring that new tax cuts or new spending programs don't increase deficits in exchange for their votes for the next debt increase.

The Senate is generally opposed to the idea, even though it was the law of the land for more than a decade.

Battles over those issues and others, such as a vote on a GOP proposal to end the Wall Street bailout program, are expected to resume during January's debate.

Except for Voinovich, Republicans — who helped supply votes to increase the debt ceiling twice last year and provided 27 votes for an $850 billion increase two years ago — opposed the legislation. It is required to issue new debt to pay for federal operations and deposit up to $50 billion into the Social Security trust funds to pay pensions.

Thursday's debt limit measure and the larger version looming in January require a supermajority of 60 votes to pass. Democrats control the chamber with 60 votes, which could require all 60 members of the Democratic caucus to vote for it, including several members who are politically endangered.

The current measure is needed as a result of the out-of-control budget deficit, which registered $1.4 trillion for the budget year that ended in September. The current debt ceiling is $12.1 trillion and is set to be reached by Dec. 31.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091224/ap_ ... bt_ceiling

(a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year ) OK...T

[HSSC]

The darn thing still works..........

Could some of you Oduma voters send Oduma a E-mail and let him know what is going on..........

My daughter is a bit concerned as to how she's going to come up with the spare change to pay for all this stupidity...............

Then again she's is only 16 so what should she be concerned about.......... =D>

[-o<

[tomjeeps2]

Congress raises debt ceiling to $12.4 trillion

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer Laurie Kellman, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 59 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Senate voted Thursday to raise the ceiling on the government debt to $12.4 trillion, a massive increase over the current limit and a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year.

The Senate's rare Christmas Eve vote, 60-39, follows House passage last week and raises the debt ceiling by $290 billion. The vote split mainly down party lines, with Democrats voting to raise the limit and Republicans voting against doing so. There was one defection on each side, by senators whose seats will be on the ballot next year: GOP Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio and Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana.

The bill permits the Treasury Department to issue enough bonds to fund the government's operations and programs until mid-February. The Senate will vote again on the issue Jan. 20.

Obama must sign the measure into law to prevent a market-rattling, first-ever default on U.S. obligations. The government piled up a record $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009 to counter a meltdown in financial markets and help bring the nation out of its worst recession in seven decades.

The early-morning vote followed the Senate's passage of a landmark bill to overhaul the nation's health care system. They were the Senate's last votes of the year.

With the exception of Voinovich, Republicans uniformly derided the bill, though they routinely supplied votes for eight previous increases totaling $5.4 trillion under President George W. Bush.

Voinovich, who is retiring, said he voted "yes" after Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed to consider amendments when the Senate takes up the matter again next month. Bayh told the Senate Budget Committee in November that he would oppose an increase in the limit unless Congress commits to a strict new debt-fighting plan.

Democrats had originally planned to pass an unprecedented increase of almost $2 trillion to avoid another vote before next year's midterm elections.

But that plan fell apart amid opposition from about a dozen Senate Democratic moderates, who refuse to support a debt limit increase unless it is accompanied by legislation to establish a new bipartisan task force to come up with a plan to curb the deficit. That idea is opposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other Democratic leaders.

Pelosi, meanwhile, is supporting demands of moderate House Democrats, who are demanding a "pay-as-you-go" budget law aimed at ensuring that new tax cuts or new spending programs don't increase deficits in exchange for their votes for the next debt increase.

The Senate is generally opposed to the idea, even though it was the law of the land for more than a decade.

Battles over those issues and others, such as a vote on a GOP proposal to end the Wall Street bailout program, are expected to resume during January's debate.

Except for Voinovich, Republicans — who helped supply votes to increase the debt ceiling twice last year and provided 27 votes for an $850 billion increase two years ago — opposed the legislation. It is required to issue new debt to pay for federal operations and deposit up to $50 billion into the Social Security trust funds to pay pensions.

Thursday's debt limit measure and the larger version looming in January require a supermajority of 60 votes to pass. Democrats control the chamber with 60 votes, which could require all 60 members of the Democratic caucus to vote for it, including several members who are politically endangered.

The current measure is needed as a result of the out-of-control budget deficit, which registered $1.4 trillion for the budget year that ended in September. The current debt ceiling is $12.1 trillion and is set to be reached by Dec. 31.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091224/ap_ ... bt_ceiling

(a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year ) OK...T

Just checking back it's now $16.777 Trillion, yup their on it...TJ

[tomjeeps2]

$16.925 Trillion that's only a $147 Billion Dollar increase since February WOW Party time...TJ

[tomjeeps2]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... 9396000000

(CNSNews.com) - Every business day since May 17, the U.S. Treasury has published a daily statement claiming that the federal debt subject to the limit set by Congress closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000—about $25 million below the legal limit. Monday, the Columbus Day holiday, according to the Daily Treasury Statement released today, marked the 150th straight day that the Treasury has said the debt subject to limit was stuck at $16,699,396,000,000. On May 17, the first day the debt closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner stating that since the Treasury was about to hit the debt limit he would begin to use “extraordinary measures” to prevent it from doing so. These included, among other things, suspending investment of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund in U.S. Treasury securities, and redeeming securities already held by this fund. “In total, the extraordinary measures currently available free up approximately $260 billion in headroom under the limit,” Lew wrote then. But in that letter, Lew described the unpredictability of the Treasury’s flow of funds to explain why he could not predict exactly when the extraordinary measures would be exhausted. “The effective duration of the extraordinary measures is subject to considerable uncertainty due to a variety of factors, including the unpredictability of tax receipts, changes in expenditure flows under the sequester, and the normal challenges of forecasting the payments and receipts of the U.S. government months into the future,” wrote Lew. “Given the uncertainty described above, at this time, Treasury is not able to provide a specific estimate of how long the extraordinary measures will last,” wrote Lew. “However, in view of the forthcoming Fannie Mae payment and the trend in other payment flows, it is now clear that the measures will not be exhausted until after Labor Day,” he wrote. On Aug. 26, Lew wrote Boehner again. “Based on our latest estimates, extraordinary measures are projected to be exhausted in the middle of October,” he said. “At that point, the United States will have reached the limit of its borrowing authority, and the Treasury would be left to fund the government with only the cash we have on hand on any given day.” On Sept. 25, Lew wrote Boehner again. “Treasury now estimates that extraordinary measures will be exhausted no later than October 17,” he said. “We estimate that, at that point, Treasury would have only approximately $30 billion to meet our country’s commitments.” On Oct. 1, Lew wrote Boehner again, restating his estimation that the “extraordinary measures” preventing the debt from breeching the limit would be exhausted “no later than October 17.” When Lew wrote each of these letters, as well as at the close of business yesterday, his Treasury reported that the debt subject to limit had closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000. - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... NrJLC.dpuf

Hmmm...TJ

[HSSC]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... 9396000000

(CNSNews.com) - Every business day since May 17, the U.S. Treasury has published a daily statement claiming that the federal debt subject to the limit set by Congress closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000—about $25 million below the legal limit. Monday, the Columbus Day holiday, according to the Daily Treasury Statement released today, marked the 150th straight day that the Treasury has said the debt subject to limit was stuck at $16,699,396,000,000. On May 17, the first day the debt closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner stating that since the Treasury was about to hit the debt limit he would begin to use “extraordinary measures” to prevent it from doing so. These included, among other things, suspending investment of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund in U.S. Treasury securities, and redeeming securities already held by this fund. “In total, the extraordinary measures currently available free up approximately $260 billion in headroom under the limit,” Lew wrote then. But in that letter, Lew described the unpredictability of the Treasury’s flow of funds to explain why he could not predict exactly when the extraordinary measures would be exhausted. “The effective duration of the extraordinary measures is subject to considerable uncertainty due to a variety of factors, including the unpredictability of tax receipts, changes in expenditure flows under the sequester, and the normal challenges of forecasting the payments and receipts of the U.S. government months into the future,” wrote Lew. “Given the uncertainty described above, at this time, Treasury is not able to provide a specific estimate of how long the extraordinary measures will last,” wrote Lew. “However, in view of the forthcoming Fannie Mae payment and the trend in other payment flows, it is now clear that the measures will not be exhausted until after Labor Day,” he wrote. On Aug. 26, Lew wrote Boehner again. “Based on our latest estimates, extraordinary measures are projected to be exhausted in the middle of October,” he said. “At that point, the United States will have reached the limit of its borrowing authority, and the Treasury would be left to fund the government with only the cash we have on hand on any given day.” On Sept. 25, Lew wrote Boehner again. “Treasury now estimates that extraordinary measures will be exhausted no later than October 17,” he said. “We estimate that, at that point, Treasury would have only approximately $30 billion to meet our country’s commitments.” On Oct. 1, Lew wrote Boehner again, restating his estimation that the “extraordinary measures” preventing the debt from breeching the limit would be exhausted “no later than October 17.” When Lew wrote each of these letters, as well as at the close of business yesterday, his Treasury reported that the debt subject to limit had closed the day at $16,699,396,000,000. - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... NrJLC.dpuf

Hmmm...TJ

OK, I'm starting to get it...... I'll take my new Visa to make payments on my old Visa.........I'll extend the limit on my old Visa so I can make the payments on the new Visa. Now why didn't I think of that sooner..........

[tomjeeps2]

U.S. debt jumps a record $328 billion — tops $17 trillion for first time
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... n-first-t/

U.S. debt jumped a record $328 billion on Thursday, the first day the federal government was able to borrow money under the deal President Obama and Congress sealed this week.

The debt now equals $17.075 trillion, according to figures the Treasury Department posted online on Friday.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PHOTOS: President Obama's favorite footstool: The famous Resolute desk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The $328 billion increase shattered the previous high of $238 billion set two years ago.

The giant jump comes because the government was replenishing its stock of “extraordinary measures” — the federal funds it borrowed from over the last five months as it tried to avoid bumping into the debt ceiling.

Under the law, that replenishing happens as soon as there is new debt space.


(Treasury Department)
Enlarge Photo
(Treasury Department) more >
In this case, the Treasury Department borrowed $400 billion from other funds beginning in May, awaiting a final deal from Congress and Mr. Obama.

Usually Congress sets a borrowing limit, or debt ceiling, that caps the total amount the government can be in the red.

But under the terms of this week’s deal, Congress set a deadline instead of a dollar cap. That means debt will rise by as much as the government spends between now and the Feb. 7 deadline.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PHOTOS: Royals really are different: Kate Middleton plays volleyball in heels

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judging by the rate of increase over the last five months, that could end up meaning Congress just granted Mr. Obama a debt increase of $700 billion or more.

Republicans initially sought to attach strings to the debt increase, but surrendered this week, instead settling on a bill that reopened the government and included some special earmark projects, but didn’t include any spending cuts.

Democrats insisted that the debt increase be “clean,” meaning without any strings attached. They say the debt increase only allows Mr. Obama to pay for the bills he and Congress already racked up, and that it doesn’t encourage new spending.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... z2iHIpQVgo
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Well their hitting the ground running as far as making up for lost time...TJ

[HSSC]

18 trillion, by, how many real tax payers...=

[tomjeeps2]

http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html

$18.287 Trillion is it me or is it finally topping out...TJ