Jobless claims were higher than expected.  Consumer spending dropped unexpected.  Mortgage foreclosures rose more than expected.  Locally, AmerenCIPS has laid off workers as a result of reducing of about $1 billion in profits.  And here I thought the economy was getting better according to our Dear Leader?  If the economy was getting better, wouldn't all those numbers be going in the reverse direction?  Any answers to that one NY Times economic witchdoctor Paul Krugman?  And now, the totals for all this spending and proposed spending is starting to come in. 

The budget deficit by the end of September will stand at almost $2 trillion.  Even the AP grudgingly reports the deficit is 4 times higher than at this time last year.  The national debt is going to be about $12 trillion very soon because Timothy Geithner has just asked Congress to raise the ceiling on the national debt.  The debt auctions are getting a bit old and there are less buyers of our debt.  I guess that's a good thing, but it also means our nation's line of credit is on the verge of being cut off. 

They still haven't spent almost 90% of the "stimulus" money and Congress has yet to decide how to pay for the health care bill.

First, no government program has ever cost less the next year than last year even adjusted for inflation.  Our nation's population is aging at a greater pace than the past so costs to Medicare and Social Security are going to go through the roof.  In addition, the current health bill's $1.2 trillion price tag is a VERY low estimate.   Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute put it best:

1.   "...the CBO should include all such costs (including any additional coverage that already insured Americans would be forced to purchase) in the total-cost figure for each bill."

2.  "Second, with those totals in hand, the CBO should assume that all new spending would be fully implemented in 2010, and then calculate the 10-year cost from that baseline."

3.  "Third, the CBO should calculate the cost of covering each previously uninsured person.  It costs Massachusetts about $6,700 to cover each previously uninsured resident, or about $27,000 to cover a family of four. Democrats should justify why they want to tax us that much when the average employer-sponsored family policy costs just $12,680."

4.  "The CBO projects that under current law, federal spending will grow from 20 percent of the economy today to nearly 40 percent by the end of this century, mainly because of Medicare and Medicaid."

Now that the true costs are figured in, then there's the question of how to pay for it.  Mr. Cannon handles that also with the help of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI).

"At the request of Ryan, the CBO estimated that federal income-tax rates would nearly have to double by midcentury (top rate: 66 percent) and more than double by 2082 (top rate: 88 percent), just to pay for those existing federal commitments."

88% for the top rate?  I can't imagine what the rate will be for everyone else!  The tyranny of the majority are modeling our political system not on what the Founding Fathers envisioned, but on the Democratic Socialism of the Northern European countries of Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway.  Geithner is already on record as saying that middle class tax increases might have to happen.  So much for that no new taxes for anyone making under $250,000...

We have entered a new era of irresponsibility where the tyranny of the majority are no longer "tax and spend" but "SPEND AND TAX".  They want to do everything now and push off any consequences on our children, grand children and great grand children.  If the United States was a business, I would have to say filing for bankruptcy would be right around the corner or would have already happened.  Lastly, as I always remind you, inflation is right around the corner so all these numbers are projected to go way, way, up - along with everything else we buy.