Where is the US economy headed?

If you wish to assert that the existence of any government control over any element in our society establishes the fact of central control, then you will have to invent a new vocabulary for real authoritarian controls.

I wake up this morning and scan the news. I have to conclude politicians are still clueless about spending. Here it is:
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/02/15/senate-dems-embrace-obama-spending-freeze-wednesday
"Dems will embrace President Obama's five-year domestic discretionary spending freeze, a move the White House estimates will save $400 billion over 10 years, according to a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide. Dems made the decision "to strike the right balance between helping create jobs...while also living within our means and reining in the deficit," the aide said."

I think to myself, but 400 billion over 10 years is a drop in the bucket.

They are always using this 10 year phrase for spending cuts, which is frustrating, and frankly silly and insulting to anyone with a brain and a calculator.

I want to hear what they will do in one year or this year. After all, 400 billion over 10 years is 40 bill in one year at best, which is nothing compared to the problem we have. I ask, do these people have any common sense whatsoever? Perhaps the better question is do these people have one ounce of honesty?

I agree with the following.

"Earlier in the day, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio and former Budget Director under President George W. Bush, told reporters, "The president has a (spending) freeze, but the freeze locks in the 24 percent increase in that spending over the last two years. That 24 percent, by the way, does not include the additional funding from the stimulus and from the supplemental, which would take it up to about 80 percent increase in the last two years.""

Conclusion: We need more people with some sense in government. Perhaps the Tea Party gives us the best hope for any?

For anyone that believes government spending creates jobs, at least good long term jobs, this graph should serve to dispel that notion.

The graph shows spending and tax revenue as a percentage of gdp, but it reflects the economy and jobs in an indirect way, by showing that more government spending does not increase tax revenue as a percentage of gdp.

I think we can assume that if there were more jobs, it would indicate a healthier economy and a higher rate of tax revenue.

I'm still looking at your last one, okie, and marveling at your brilliant insights...
how's Rush doing today?

The Pentagon has had a decade-long business partnership with the NASCAR stock-car racing circuit that has been a boon to the sport. But amid the House's Republican-led frenzy to cut federal spending, some Democrats have made it a target, backing an amendment to the fiscal 2011 continuing resolution that would prohibit any of its funds going toward military sponsorships of stock cars.