28 Replies to “$17,000 – $20 = $16,980”

  2. Not sure what the math is supposed to prove, as it seems to me that being $17,000 in the hole and borrowing more (increased deficit) bumps up the $17,000 to $17,020 after 1 week?
    Anyway, I think the meat of the story is the horrendous increase in the debt that was basically wasted.

  3. It is $17,000 per year and $20 per week. So technically, the equation should be:
    $17,000 – $20*52 = $17,000 – $1040 = $15,960.
    This is a little better, but not much. Especially if there are four people in a household and instead of $17,000 you have $68,000 in debt to pay off.
    Personally, I think the reduction in SS was chosen to make a statement. I mean $1040? The number is a reminder that the gummint’s gonna get it all regardless.

  4. Barry can spend like a fool for all he’s worth.
    He won’t be able to avoid the same result every other profligate socialist nation has or is experiencing.
    The Thatcher rule is still in effect . . . socialism seems to work wonderfully until you run out of other people’s money to spend.
    Then the ugly sets in fast & hard. Look at Greece.
    That’s where Obammassiah is taking the USA.

  5. Great stuff Captain! I especially love your devout support of Ron Paul! I wish more of your countrymen would hop aboard and endorse him for Pres!
    Ron Paul 2012 !

  6. This is only the annual federal budget. Left out of the reckoning are the unfunded liabilities, specifically civil service and military pensions, and old age security. The US has failed to deal with these matters during the past three years, and that too will have an added cost in the future.
    These costs are only the beginning. Obamacare will boost the deficits considerably higher in future years.

  7. Hooray for Ron Paul, eh Cap’n!?!
    And may each of the NATO signatory nations quickly develop stockpiles of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, because they’re gonna need’em if RonPaulstiltskin is POTUS.
    How’d you feel about Canada having nukes on your border, eh Cap’n?

  9. And may each of the NATO signatory nations quickly develop stockpiles of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, because they’re gonna need’em if RonPaulstiltskin is POTUS.
    Why?

  10. That $20 is a reduction in taxes, not deficit spending.
    This is the real math:
    $17,000(deficit spending) + $1040(nominal bribe with own money) = $18,040(adjusted deficit spending).

  11. Why?
    ~SDH
    Because of President Ron Paul’s foreign policy each of those nations will have to basically imitate Israel’s defence policy.
    They will only be able to field conventional armies on their own soil for defence and need WMDs for deterrence against attack/invasion by nations which can field huge conventional forces.

  12. Oz: If the US jumps out of NATO and the UN, who says the rest of NATO cannot defend themselves or do whatever the NATO signatory countries want? Secondly, Israel’s defense policy is one of the best on earth, and can readily defend itself from its surrounding savages!
    Imagine if the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, France, Greece, etc actually spent money on an ARMY (which is where their money *should* go), instead of on their socialist nanny utopias? Perhaps they could then solve their own problems, without crying to the US for aid/support? In essence the USA is subsidizing security for socialist nanny states in much the same way all of Canada subsidizes Quebec and Attawapiskat.
    To heck with Europe. If they don’t want armies, let ’em burn. We got guns here.

  13. Mike, you seem confused. Sweden is constitutionally neutral. It follows Switzerland’s policy, namely that it’s armed to the teeth. Pray tell, how do you expect Greece to spend money on an army? How do you think it got that way? By spending cash it didn’t have on weapons rusting in warehouses.
    “We got guns here.”
    Don’t make me laugh. Your peashooters are useless against military equipment. Why do you think it is that the Canadian military, despite being badly outnumbered had the Taliban on the run for four years in the worst hellhole in Afghanistan? You’ve been watching too many bad movies, my friend.
    “Israel’s defense policy is one of the best on earth…”
    Indeed it is. Made possible only by large financial contributions from outside the country. Even at that, it’s only possible with a universal military service and by gobbling up at least 20% of the country’s total budget. With the high taxes Israel pays, you’ll really have something to complain about.
    “To heck with Europe.”
    The US tried that once already. It failed in 1939. You really should try learning something from history. We have progressed a bit beyond the invention of fire.

  14. who says the rest of NATO cannot defend themselves or do whatever the NATO signatory countries want?
    ~Mike in Calgary
    Not me.
    I was just wondering if a world armed to the teeth with WMD was what so many conservative Americans figured would result from losing the American nuclear deterrent.
    Every nation, not just NATO, which figures the U.S. into their defence would immediately have to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons to fill that hole.
    It would be quite a change from the goal of limiting the proliferation of WMD that the entire western world has pursued, with few exceptions, since the end of WWII.
    It would mean scrapping chemical weapons treaties, bio-weapons treaties, nuclear proliferations treaties, and area denial weapons treaties like the Land Mines Treaty.
    Just a “heads up” to what Ron Paul’s foreign policy means on a practical level.

  15. I don’t get the point based on those numbers. What are you saying. It’s 20 a week? Or what am I missing … is this a trick bag thing?

  16. No one got the arithmetic correct, Abe, although Mark and Stricker came close. Here’s the deal:
    The gubmint is borrowing roughly $17,000 per person in the US this year. They are then going to let you keep $20/wk ($1040/yr) IF you’re employed that they would usually take from you. Since the debt is (officially, anyway) calculated as gross expenses – gross revenue, the $17k figure already should include the $20/wk largesse. So, unless large numbers of Americans send that $1040/yr to the gubmint for debt relief (.. crickets chirping..), the payroll tax rebate has no effect on per capita debt.
    Stricker’s correct it’s a bribe with your own money. Mark is correct, in the sense that if some new insect overlords suddenly appeared and demanded full payment of all this year’s debt, you’d only be on the hook for another $15,960 IF you’re employed. The “captain”‘s headline number seems to have appeared after a lengthy discussion with another captain by name of “Morgan”.

  17. I may get egged for this but I believe it to be true. One of my other favourite bloggers advocates for the re-election of the Obama Administration.
    By re-electing Obutthole, the demise of the current nation would be hastened and the country would go down in a blaze of idiocy – and the rebuilding process could finally begin.
    As it is electing any of the current RINO’s vying for the Oval Office will only delay the inevitable.
    I believe the man has a valid point.

  18. the country would go down in a blaze of idiocy – and the rebuilding process could finally begin.
    ~Big Bad Jim
    So, would you be of the opinion that since the U.S. doesn’t have any enemies, that going down in “a blaze of idiocy” would be the worst that would happen and no outside forces would interfer with the “rebuilding process” by attacking the U.S.(or backing some destabilizing splinter faction) in it’s weakened state?

  20. That’s a good point Oz. Yes, there would be some element of risk there. I never considered it.
    But now that you mention it…my thinking is that both we and the Americans were in this exact same boat already. Both countries went into WW1 and WW2 unprepared, in the midst of crippling financial times. In addition both countries were controlled by pacifist lefties and poltroons at the time.
    Remember too – without us feeding them dollars or buying their products our enemies will also be in deep financial straights.
    What option do we have Oz? Dragging this out will only make it more expensive and there is no avoiding the financial chit storm ahead. In spite of your good points I think I still agree with my man – the timing of a controlled ‘crash and burn’ isn’t going to get any better IMO.

  21. the timing of a controlled ‘crash and burn’ isn’t going to get any better IMO.
    ~Big Bad Jim
    I think it would be better if the guy in the pilot’s seat didn’t hate America as Obama was raised to and was trying to land the burning plane as intact as possible instead of flying it into a 110 story building.
    There’s bad and then there’s worse.
    JMO

  22. By re-electing Obutthole, the demise of the current nation would be hastened and the country would go down in a blaze of idiocy – and the rebuilding process could finally begin.
    I know quite a few Americans who voted for him the last time with exactly that in mind, and are now very disappointed that it hasn’t happened yet.
    Many have concluded that the POTUS is merely a figurehead and that no matter who is elected the oligarchy and the government bureaucracy that actually runs the country will keep muddling through because the whole world is too afraid of what would happen if the American economy was to crumble.

  23. because the whole world is too afraid of what would happen if the American economy was to crumble.
    ~North of 60
    I don’t think Russia is afraid in the least.
    bit of trivia: Did you know that Obama’s mother and father met because they were enrolled in a Russian language course at the university of Hawaii…in 1960…at the height of the Cold War?
    Did I mention they were both studying Russian?

  24. Oz
    Interesting theory but you overlook Canada’s unique geographical position. For better or worse, Canada is critical to the USA.
    The USA has strategic problems. Being physically separated from Alaska is one. Canada is not an offshore island like Cuba or the Bahamas but a contiguous land mass with a long border abutting the USA. Access to Canada’s resources is a lessor matter.
    Diversifying to markets other than the USA will take time, the coming US elections are the most critical to Canada’s welfare in history.
    The Captain’s main point is the unsustainability of Maobama’s spendthrift policies. The US economy is much stronger that that of Greece but 4 more years?

  25. Oz
    Interesting theory but you overlook Canada’s unique geographical position.
    ~sasquatch
    I do? Where? In which comment of mine is the observation of Canada’s geographical position germane?
    If Ron Paul were POTUS and Pakistan were to smote Toronto with a nuke, President Paul would stick to his Libertarian guns and avoid foreign entanglements.
    Would it be unreasonable?
    Yes, but folks don’t call him crazy for nothing.
    You betcha.
    MAD would cease to exist as an American doctrine for any non-American cities currently under the American nuclear umbrella with Ron Paul as POTUS and it would mean all of us would have to get our own WMDs as a deterrent.

  26. …and Pakistan were to smote Toronto with a nuke”
    Have you been here lately?
    That would be a so called “friendly fire incident”

  27. That $1040/year tax break is symbolic, at best, since the US govt is still spending money at the same rate. All that is happening is that mom and dad are taking home an extra $1040/annum but the government is taking out a loan of an equal amount against their childrens future earnings.

  28. “…and Pakistan were to smote Toronto with a nuke”
    then they would get a thank you note from the ROC. /sarc

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation