Congress at work: $1 billion an hour

[run_to_win]

Congress at work: '$1 billion an hour'.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has come up with a vivid new way to express his contention that the nation is spending way too much money it doesn’t have.

McConnell includes the tweaks in his opening remarks on the Senate floor on the 51st day that President Obama has been in office.

“In just 50 days, Congress has voted to spend about $1.2 trillion between the Stimulus and the Omnibus,” McConnell says. “To put that in perspective, that’s about $24 billion a day, or about $1 billion an hour—most of it borrowed. There’s simply no question: government spending has spun out of control.”

The math: 50 days times 24 hours equals 1,200 hours. 1,200 times 1 billion equals 1.2 trillion.

Even as he proposes a huge increase in the reach of government, the president continued to try to show his concern about spending by making an announcement Wednesday about earmark reform.

source.   

That's $16.7 million dollars per minute, or $278K per second. Not a bad gig if you can get it.

A billion is not an easy number to comprehend.  To help put it into perspective,
a billion seconds ago it was 1959. 
a billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. 
a billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. 
a billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.

How long can we continue to borrow $1,000,000,000 per hour and remain solvent as a country?

[Dphins4me]

How long can we continue to borrow $1,000,000,000 per hour and remain solvent as a country?

  Its alright.   Obama is going to cut earmarks & reduce Gov spending.    His simple words make me feel all warm & fuzzy inside.

I pay no attention to the 8000-9000 earmarks he just signed into law.

[Frimp]

^^
That made me laugh. 

[Fau Teixeira]

in practical terms ..

what does the deficit matter ?

we will never ever pay off the national debt .. ever.

there is no scenario i can possibly envision that could "force" the US government to ever pay off the debt.

Thanks china for the cash !

[Frimp]

^^

That also made me laugh. 

[Dphins4me]

in practical terms ..

what does the deficit matter ?

we will never ever pay off the national debt .. ever.

there is no scenario i can possibly envision that could "force" the US government to ever pay off the debt.

Thanks china for the cash !

I know one.  If China comes calling for their cash? 

Its thinking like this that has lead the US into the trouble its in.  Why pay back a credit card?  Mortgage?

[Frimp]

^^^

Didn't you see those interviews right after Obama was elected? Obama is going to make sure that people don't have to worry about paying their mortgage or gassing up their cars anymore.

[Sunstroke]

For the sake of accuracy, this thread should immediately be renamed  "GOP Whine Cellar"

[YoFuggedaboutit]

For the sake of accuracy, this thread should immediately be renamed  "GOP Whine Cellar"

Got a little cheese to go with the whine?   

[BingeBag]

in practical terms ..

what does the deficit matter ?

we will never ever pay off the national debt .. ever.

there is no scenario i can possibly envision that could "force" the US government to ever pay off the debt.

Thanks china for the cash !

This house of cards relies entirely on Chinese and other capital-rich nations to have faith in our ability to pay back these bonds. If our government loses that trust, we are in HUGE trouble.

[Spider-Dan]

  Its alright.   Obama is going to cut earmarks & reduce Gov spending.    His simple words make me feel all warm & fuzzy inside.

I pay no attention to the 8000-9000 earmarks he just signed into law.

I find it funny that people are criticizing Obama for not living up to McCain's campaign promises.

Do you not remember when Obama characterized McCain's lust for eliminating earmarks as "using a hatchet when you need a scalpel"?  Obama was not the one perpetually railing against earmarks; he pledged to examine them "line-by-line," get rid of the ones that don't work, and improve the efficiency of the ones that do.

It was McCain that opposed earmarks for the sake of being earmarks.

[run_to_win]

This house of cards relies entirely on Chinese and other capital-rich nations to have faith in our ability to pay back these bonds. If our government loses that trust, we are in HUGE trouble.

Please explain why we'd be in huge trouble.

[Dphins4me]

I find it funny that people are criticizing Obama for not living up to McCain's campaign promises.

Do you not remember when Obama characterized McCain's lust for eliminating earmarks as "using a hatchet when you need a scalpel"?  Obama was not the one perpetually railing against earmarks; he pledged to examine them "line-by-line," get rid of the ones that don't work, and improve the efficiency of the ones that do.

It was McCain that opposed earmarks for the sake of being earmarks.

  Both canidates promised to earmark reform.   That is a factual.

Obama did promise to go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.

The difference?  It appears Obama believes that any more spent by Washington  is money spent wisely.   8000 - 9000 earmarks & all of them is money spent wisely?

This coming on the heel of a stimulus bill full of earmarks?

Come on. 

Again, stop watching his lips & start watching his action.  He is simply looking America into their collective eyes & saying "I know you people are the biggest bunch of suckers on the face of the earth."

[fyo]

This coming on the heel of a stimulus bill full of earmarks?

The earmarks were, what, a percent or two or the whole package? I'm not sure that qualifies as "full of". Unless succeeded by "it" and preceded by "you're".

[Spider-Dan]

Obama did promise to go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.

The difference?  It appears Obama believes that any more spent by Washington  is money spent wisely.   8000 - 9000 earmarks & all of them is money spent wisely?

"8000-9000 earmarks" = ~2% of the budget.  And apparently, he does think that this is money spent wisely.  He promised to get rid of programs that don't work, and streamline those that do; along these lines, he's already made cuts to the Medicare Advantage plan.

Again, if you want to level a charge against him for not eliminating earmarks, that's your right.  But he never campaigned to "eliminate earmarks" and "veto earmarked spending."  That was McCain's rallying cry, not Obama's... and Obama made it a point to oppose that kind of attitude during the campaign (see: "hatchet vs. scalpel" statement).