We are operating at a deficit that is the biggest in many years. I'm not
happy with that at all.

And we have tax cuts?  How, pray tell, are we going to pay for all those
services?  I'm mainly afraid that essential social welfare programs are
going to get cut even more and so are educational programs.  Our
children are suffering.

Kat

ken barber wrote:
> if i miss read, i do appologize to both mag and her
> paper. thanks, deri. it makes it much better if we are
> talking about the same thing and i do fell better to
> know that her paper is accurately reporting. i do
> appologize mag.
>   so if we are talking 3 billion a month is actually
> lest than the roughly 2/3 billion a day that was
> appropriated.
>    it is not easy to think in the billions, but the
> total budget is over 3000 billion. that is 3 trillion,
> or was it 5 trillion.
>    any way you take it, i am not happy with the bush
> admin for letting spending get so much. if i live
> beyond my means, the banks would eventually cut me
> off. the government just prints more money. that is
> what the gold standard did for us, it restraind the
> printing of money hap hazardly. as a conservative i
> can not be happy about that, however i'll refer back
> to kyles post of the head start program. one of the
> few government programs that works well. i have no
> children who would be in it, but, i'd leave that
> program just as it is. find some that are not working
> and cut those. and by working, i mean doing what was
> origonally planned.
> --- Deri James <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Hi Ken,
>>
>>If you read Mag's post again I think the paper she
>>read claimed 3 bn a month
>>(not per day!!). Seems, from your figures, elements
>>of the US press are
>>trying to downplay the true cost of the war. ;-)
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Deri
>>
>>On Monday 21 Jul 2003 10:39 pm, you wrote:
>>
>>>might be a bit of a little bit of exaggeratin for
>>>effect, or a lie if you wish. the house of
>>>represenatives passed a suplemetal budget for 85
>>>billion to carry 120 days of "active combat." we
>>
>>are
>>
>>>now spending let than "active combat" rate. my
>>
>>math
>>
>>>says that 85 billion for 120 days is less than a
>>>billion a day. we are spending even less. as a %
>>
>>of
>>
>>>gnp this is the cheapest war we have ever fought.
>>
>>>>[log in to unmask] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>One of my helpers was on a plane with some
>>
>>GI's
>>
>>>>who had just come home. They
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>told her we are sending video games, air
>>>>
>>>>conditioning, cell phones so they can
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>phone home, etc.... This came up when I was
>>>>
>>>>looking at a headline in the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>paper 3 billion a month to keep this war
>>
>>going. It
>>
>>>>boggles my mind.