re: #74 trendsurfer

That Times article actually ignores that $787 billion (really $1.3 trillion and counting including interest) in Obama’s stimulus package. Obama’s favorable budgeting includes allowing most of the Bush tax cuts to expire (and that’s treated as a cost - to the government).

There’s plenty of disingenous stuff out there on both sides, but Obama’s spending is out of control; spending under Bush was out of control - and that doesn’t include the Iraq/Afghan military ops.

Government spending is out of control - from the fed on down to local levels and no one can afford the consequences. So everyone is apparently trying to push the solutions off into the future - delaying and deferring pension payments, refinancing debt and extending obligations, and playing around the margins with tax “relief” all while government spending continues.

Even where politicians say that they’re going to cut spending - or even freeze spending, they come under attack as in NJ where Gov. Christie called for a spending freeze demanding that localities spend down their rainy day funds to pay for the rest of the school year - and the unions and Democrats call that a massive education cut. The state is bleeding in the red and has a $2 billion (and that’s probably optimistic) deficit. NJ isn’t even in the worst shape; that’s CA; NY isn’t far behind. All states pretty much had their fiscal situation papered over last year with the stimulus package, but the aid isn’t going to be available this year. That meant states got to continue padding their budgets and maintaining their spending (or increased it) even as revenues dropped off a cliff.