US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments and Subsidies To Be Eliminated!

Posted on May 7, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Economics, Education, Employment, Health Care, Investments, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Taxes, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

federal_spending

Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

 

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: A $53 Trillion Federal Financial Hole

 

Our Country is Broke – How You Can Fix It

 

I.O.U.S.A.: Byte-Sized – The 30 Minute Version

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_TjBNjc9Bo

 

government_subsidies

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODZmNTg2ZWUyMTA1ZDU5N2MyYzhkNjFjZWMyZGI5NTc=

 

Contracts and Assistance Spending in Billions of Dollars

 
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
All Awards Recovery Act Awards only
Contracts
 $208.314
 $219.231
 $258.980
 $297.828
 $343.228
 $385.148
 $423.430
 $456.979
 $517.898
 $146.322
 $1.802
Grants
 $294.511
 $330.738
 $406.158
 $493.317
 $449.656
 $441.122
 $489.194
 $417.279
 $404.978
 $197.608
 $36.230
Loans2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
 $0.409
 $0.626
 $-0.005
 $0.008
Insurance
 $431.320
 $492.207
 $556.586
 $567.211
 $603.890
 $653.229
 $771.275
 $2.265
 $4.482
 $1.378
 $0.00
Direct Payments
(e.g. Social Security)
 $768.254
 $839.649
 $841.514
 $947.943
 $965.484
 $1,004.074
 $1,092.687
 $10.487
 $42.642
 $22.314
 $1.777
Other type of Assistance Other assistance help link
 $2.816
 $2.675
 $0.233
 $0.663
 $0.379
 $0.300
 $3.847
 $25.498
 $40.487
 $27.332
 $17.098
Total
 $1,705.215
 $1,884.501
 $2,063.471
 $2,306.962
 $2,362.637
 $2,483.873
 $2,780.433
 $912.917
 $1,011.113
 $394.950
 $56.915

 http://www.usaspending.gov/ 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)

https://cfda.symplicity.com/index?s=main&mode=list&tab=listAll

Obama to Revamp Student Loans 

Carolyn Karno on the Problems in Eliminating FFELP

College Loan Train Wreck

The Scam Of The Government’s Guarantees For Student Loans

Peter Schiff on Student Loans Crisis 2008-04-17 Bloomberg

Dr. Harry Binswanger on Glenn Beck MAY 4, 2009

 

The Future of Federal Student Loans – Event Highlights

Default: the Student Loan Documentary

 

For all practical purposes the Federal Government is insolvent.

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now!

If it had to complete a stress test that the banks are undergoing, it would be declared dead on arrival or insolvent.

The time has come to downsize the Federal Government by eliminating whole Departments and the Federal aid and subsidies they provide to special interest groups.

The Federal Government subsidizes special interest groups by taking the taxes paid by the American people and giving it to other individuals that are politically connected.

These special interest groups give campaign contributions to both political parties in exchange for their support of subsidies and tax breaks.

Two of the worse subsidies are for ethanol and sugar:

20/20 – Politically Incorrect Guide To Politics – Pt. 5 of 6

 

Myth: Corn Ethanol is Great

 

The Case Against the Sugar Program on CNBC Squawk Box

 

If you asked the American people what one Federal program would they would keep and try to save–the response would be overwhelming–Social Security followed closely by Medicare.

Unless the Federal Government starts to eliminate whole departments and their corresponding Federal aid, grants and subsidies,  Social Security benefits will have to be drastically cut and Medicare eliminated within the next ten to twenty years.

There is no money in a trust fund or lock box.

 For decades the Federal Government used any surplus in Social Security to pay for other government expenditures.

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Deficits and Social Security

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Social Security+Medicare Projections

The Federal govenment spent your Social Security money, just like  Bernie Madoff did.

How Does a Ponzi Scheme Work?

Financier Bernard Madoff Admits 50 Billion Dollar Fraud

Social Security is an intergenrational ponzi scheme.

Social Security Ponzi Scheme

 

Milton Friedman – Government & The Poor

The professional politicians are in denial and acting irresponsibly.

Recently President Obama announced that the Federal Government was going to directly provide student loans.

The so-called savings of eliminating the profits earned by financial institutions would go to expand the Pell grant program.

The Federal Government should not be involved at all in the financing of college education.

If an individual wants to go to college, either work while you go to college or take a loan and pay it back after graduation.

Pell grants should be eliminated not expanded.

Do not expect other Americans to provide subsidies so that students can go to college.

Libertarians favor limited government. How limited?

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)

As a classical liberal or libertarian, I agree with the late  Milton Friedman that most of the Federal Departments could and should be eliminated including the following nine departments:

  1. Department of Agriculture
  2. Department of Commerce
  3. Department of Education
  4. Department of Energy
  5. Department of Health and Human Services
  6. Department of Housing and Urban Development
  7. Department of the Interior
  8. Department of Labor
  9. Department of Transportation

Most Libertarians would still support having the following six departments but with significantly reduced budgets and number of employees:

  1. Department of State
  2. Department of Justice
  3. Department of Defense
  4. Department of Homeland Security
  5. Department of the Treasury

 

If the nine  Departments above were eliminated, most if not all of their federal aid or subsidy programs would also be eliminated as well.

This includes grants, loans, insurance, scholarships and other benifits.

There are now over 1800 federal aid, grant and subsidy programs.

For a complete list go to the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assitance (CFDA) web site:

https://cfda.symplicity.com/index?s=main&mode=list&tab=list

There are now over 20 million Americans searching for a full time job.

President Obama and the radical socialist Democratic Party want to make the American people dependent upon a Federal Government that is broke.

The time has come to face facts and stop them from wrecking the US economy and destroying even more jobs.

Instead of cutting Federal Government spending and cutting taxes, the radical socialist of the Democratic Party led by President Obama want to increase both.

Senator Obama’s Social Security Tax Plan

You are invited to attend a Tea Party on July 4, 2009, Indepedence Day!

 

Join the Second American Revolution

 

we_the_people

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

 

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People 

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!” 

 

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

liberty_bell1

 “Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

 

 Let Freedom Ring  

 

 

 

Thomas Paine on to Washington

 

switchfoot-dare you to move(live)

 
 

Background Articles and Videos 

 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)

“…The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is a government-wide compendium of Federal programs, 

projects, services, and activities that provide assistance or benefits to the American public. It contains

financial and nonfinancial assistance programs administered by departments and establishments of the

Federal government.

In 1984, Public Law 98-169 authorized the transfer of responsibilities of the Federal Program Information

Act from the Office of Management and Budget to the General Services Administration (GSA). The

transfer took place in July 1984. These responsibilities include the dissemination of Federal domestic

assistance program information through the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, pursuant to the

Federal Program Information Act, Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 98-169. GSA now

maintains the Federal assistance information database from which program information is obtained. The

Office of Management and Budget serves as an intermediary agent between the Federal agencies and GSA,

thus providing oversight to the necessary collection of Federal domestic assistance program data. …”

https://cfda.symplicity.com/index?s=main&mode=list&tab=listAll

 

Subsidy

“…In economics, a subsidy (also known as a subvention) is a form of financial assistance paid to a business or economic sector. A subsidy can be used to support businesses that might otherwise fail, or to encourage activities that would otherwise not take place.

Subsidies can be regarded as a form of protectionism or trade barrier by making domestic goods and services artificially competitive against imports. Subsidies may distort markets, and can impose large economic costs.[1] Financial assistance in the form of a subsidy may come from one’s government, but the term subsidy may also refer to assistance granted by others, such as individuals or non-governmental institutions, although these would be more commonly described as charity. …”

“… Types of subsidies

There are many different ways to classify subsidies, such as the reason behind them, the recipients of the subsidy, the source of the funds (government, consumer, general tax revenues, etc). In economics, one of the primary ways to classify subsidies is the means of distributing the subsidy.

In economics, the term subsidy may or may not have a negative connotation: that is, the use of the term may not be prescriptive but descriptive. In economics, a subsidy may nonetheless be characterized as inefficient relative to no subsidies; inefficient relative to other means of producing the same results; “second-best”, implying an inefficient but feasible solution (contrasted with an efficient but not feasible ideal), among other possible terminology. In other cases, a subsidy may be an efficient means of correcting a market failure.

For example, economic analysis may suggest that direct subsidies (cash benefits) would be more efficient than indirect subsidies (such as trade barriers); this does not necessarily imply that direct subsidies are good, but that they may be more efficient or effective than other mechanisms to achieve the same (or better) results.

 

Insofar as they are inefficient, however, subsidies would generally be considered by economists to be bad, as economics is the study of efficient use of limited resources. Ultimately, however, the choice to enact a subsidy is a political choice. Note that subsidies are linked to the concept of economic transfers from one group to another.

Economics has also explicitly identified a number of areas where subsidies are entirely justified by economics, particularly in the area of provision of public goods.

 

Direct subsidies

Direct subsidies are the most simple, and arguably the least frequently used[citation needed]. They involve a direct cash transfer to the recipient, for example an unemployed person or an agricultural corporation.

 

 Indirect Subsidies

Indirect subsidy is a term sufficiently broad that it may cover most other forms of subsidy. The term would cover any form of subsidy that does not involve a direct transfer.

 

 Labor subsidies

A labor subsidy is any form of subsidy where the recipients receive subsidies to pay for labor costs. Examples may include labor subsidies and tax deductions for workers in industries, such as the film and/or television industries. (see: Runaway production)

 

 Tax Subsidy

A tax subsidy is any form of subsidy where the recipients receive the benefit through the tax system, usually through the income tax, profit tax, or consumption tax systems. Examples may include tax deductions for workers in certain industries, accelerated depreciation for certain industries or types of equipment, or exemption from consumption tax (sales tax or value added tax).

 

 Perverse subsidies

The term “perverse” can be applied to a subsidy by its opponents if they believe that it encourages undesirable actions with social costs. Possible examples, suggested by environmentalist Norman Myers, are German subsidies on coal mining and American gasoline subsidies.[2]

 

 Production subsidies

In certain cases (to encourage the development of a particular industry, for example), governments may provide direct production subsidies—cash payments for production of a given good or service. Frequently, production subsidies are easily identifiable, such as minimum price policies. Indirect production subsidies may be less easy to identify, such as infrastructure subsidies.

 

 Regulatory advantages

Policy may directly or indirectly favour one industry, company, product, or class of producer over another by means of regulations. For example, a requirement that full-time government inspectors (at company expense) be present to inspect meat may favor large producers; conversely, if small producers were not required to undergo meat inspections at all, this may constitute a subsidy to that class of producer. It may not be evident or clear that there is a subsidy in many cases.

 

 Infrastructure subsidies

Infrastructure subsidies may be used to refer to a form of indirect production subsidy, whereby the provision of infrastructure (at public expense) may effectively be useful for only a limited group of potential users, such as construction of roads at government expense for a single logging company. The implication is that those users or industries benefit disproportionately from the provision of that infrastructure, at the expense of taxpayers.

In some cases, the “subsidy” may refer to favoring one type of production or consumption over another, effectively reducing the competitiveness or retarding the development of potential substitutes. For example, it has been argued that the use of petroleum, and particularly gasoline, has been “subsidized” or favored by U.S. defense policy, reducing the use of alternative energy sources and delaying their commercial development.

In other cases, the government may need to improve the public transport to ensure pareto improvement is attanied and sustained.This can therefore be done by subsidising those transit agencies that provide the public services so that the services can be affordable for everyone.This is the best way of helping different groups of disabled and low income families in the society.

 

 Trade protection (Import)

Measures used to limit imports from other countries may constitute another form of hidden subsidy. The economic argument is that consumers of a given product are forced to pay higher prices for a given good than they would pay without the trade barrier; the protected industry has effectively received a subsidy. Such measures include import quotas, import tariffs, import bans, and others.

 

Export subsidies (trade promotion)

Various tax or other measures may be used to promote exports that constitute subsidies to the industries favored. In other cases, tax measures may be used to ensure that exports are treated “fairly” under the tax system. The determination of what constitutes a subsidy (or the size of that subsidy) may be complex. In many cases, export subsidies are justified as a means of compensating for the subsidies or protections provided by a foreign state to its own producers.

 

 Procurement subsidies

Governments everywhere are relatively large consumers of various goods and services. Subsidies may occur in this process by choice of the products consumed, the producer, the nature of the product itself, and by other means, including payment of higher-than-market prices for goods purchased.

 

 Consumption subsidies

Governments everywhere provide consumption subsidies in a number of ways: by actually giving away a good or service, providing use of government assets, property, or services at lower than the cost of provision, or by providing economic incentives (cash subsidies) to purchase or use such goods. In most countries, consumption of education, health care, and infrastructure (such as roads) are heavily subsidized, and in many cases provided free of charge. In other cases, governments literally purchase or produce a good (such as bread, wheat, gasoline, or electricity) at higher prices than the cost of sale to the public (which may require rationing to control the cost).

The provision of true public goods through consumption subsidies is an example of a type of subsidy that economics may recognize as efficient. In other cases, such subsidies may be reasonable second-best solutions; for example, while it may be theoretically efficient to charge for all use of public roads, in practice, the cost of implementing a system to charge for such use may be unworkable or unjustified.

In other cases, consumption subsidies may be targeted at a specific group of users, such as large utilities, residential home-owners, and others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidy

 

Aboard the Gravy Train
Federal spending is not only increasing but working its way deeper into our lives.
 

By Chris Edwards

“…When filling out your tax forms, you might want to think for a second about where all that money is going. After federal spending roughly doubled in the Bush years, it is growing by leaps and bounds under President Obama. What’s more, the federal government is increasing the scope of its activities — it is intervening in many areas that used to be left to state and local governments, businesses, charities, and individuals.

There are now a staggering 1,804 subsidy programs in the federal budget. Hundreds of programs were added this decade, and the recent stimulus bill added even more. The result is that we are in the midst of the largest federal gold rush at taxpayer expense since the 1960s.  …”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODZmNTg2ZWUyMTA1ZDU5N2MyYzhkNjFjZWMyZGI5NTc=

Agricultural Subsidies

by Chris Edwards

“…The USDA distributes between $10 billion and $30 billion in cash subsidies to farmers and owners of farmland each year.1 The particular amount depends on market prices for crops, the level of disaster payments, and other factors. More than 90 percent of agriculture subsidies go to farmers of five crops—wheat, corn, soybeans, rice, and cotton.2 Roughly a million farmers and landowners receive subsidies, but the payments are heavily tilted toward the largest producers.

In addition to routine cash subsidies, the USDA provides subsidized crop insurance, marketing support, and other services for farm businesses. The USDA also performs extensive agricultural research and generates statistical data for the industry. These indirect subsidies and services cost taxpayers about $5 billion each year, putting total farm support at between $15 billion and $35 billion annually.

Agriculture has long attracted federal government support. The first subsidy program for agriculture was the Morrill Act of 1862, which established the land-grant colleges. That was followed by the Hatch Act of 1887, which funded agricultural research, and by the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, which funded agriculture education. Still, the subsidies remained small, and until the 1930s the USDA’s agriculture efforts were mainly focused on producing statistics, funding research, and responding to problems such as pest infestations.

A large array of farm subsidy programs was enacted during the 1930s, beginning with the Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1933. New Deal programs included commodity price supports and production controls, marketing orders to limit competition, import barriers, and crop insurance. The particular structures of farm programs have changed over time, but the central planning philosophies behind them have changed little in seven decades. Dozens of other industries have been deregulated and opened to domestic and global competition in recent decades. But agricultural policies remain stuck in the 1930s, despite the failures of those policies. …

http://www.cato.org/downsizing/agriculture/agriculture_subsidies.html

 

Agricultural  Subsidy

“An agricultural subsidy is a governmental subsidy paid to farmers and agribusinesses to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such commodities. Examples of such commodities include wheat, feed grains (grain used as fodder, such as maize, sorghum, barley, and oats), cotton, milk, rice, peanuts, sugar, tobacco, and oilseeds such as soybeans. …”

“…The U.S. Agricultural Department is required by law (various U.S. farm bills which are passed every few years) to subsidize over two dozen commodities. Between 1996 and 2002, an average of $16 billion/year was paid by programs authorized by various U.S. farm bills dating back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the Agricultural Act of 1949, and the Commodity Credit Corporation (created in 1933), among others.[citation needed]

The beneficiaries of the subsidies have changed as agriculture in the United States has changed. In the 1930s, about 25% of the country’s population resided on the nation’s 6,000,000 small farms. By 1997, 157,000 large farms accounted for 72% of farm sales, with only 2% of the U.S. population residing on farms.

The subsidy programs give farmers extra money for their crops and guarantee a price floor. For instance in the 2002 Farm Bill, for every bushel of wheat sold farmers were paid an extra 52 cents and guaranteed a price of 3.86 from 2002–03 and 3.92 from 2004–2007.[4] That is, if the price of wheat in 2002 was 3.80 farmers would get an extra 58 cents per bushel (52 cents plus the $0.06 price difference).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy

 

Administering Sugar Imports

“…Raw cane sugar, refined sugar, sugar syrups, specialty sugars and sugar-containing products enter the United States under a variety of tariff-rate quotas (TRQs).  A tariff-rate quota provides for a low tariff on a certain quantity (the quota amount), and a higher tariff on any quantity above the level of the quota.  Under the WTO (Uruguay Round) and some other free trade agreements, the United States has committed to minimum annual low-duty access amounts for certain sugars and sugar-containing products.  Sugar and any related products paying the high tariff may enter in unlimited quantities.

The USDA also administers three re-export programs involving sugar.  The USDA’s Sugar-Containing Products Re-Export Program is designed to put U.S. manufacturers of sugar-containing products on a level playing field in the world market.  The Refined Sugar Re-Export Program is designed to facilitate the use of domestic refining capacity to export refined sugar into the world market.  The Sugar for the Production of Polyhydric Alcohol Program is established to provide world priced sugar to U.S. manufacturers of polyhydric alcohols. 

Fact Sheet:  Background on all FAS sugar import activities

…”

http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/imports/ussugar.aspObama Spotlights Student Loan Reform

By Michael A. Fletcher


“…President Obama today touted his plans to cut banks out of the business of administering federally-guaranteed student loans, saying the choice comes down to supporting special interests or supporting financial aid for millions of students.

Speaking at the White House, Obama said that the change, which has drawn opposition from members of Congress from both parties, would save tens of billions of dollars. That money — which has been estimated by White House budget makers to be as much as $48 billion over the decade — would be enough to cover 95 percent of the cost of his plan to increase Pell Grants for students and peg future increases to an index higher than inflation.

“We have a student loan system where we’re giving lenders billions of dollars in wasteful subsidies that could be used to make college more affordable for all Americans,” Obama said. …”

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/04/24/obama_spotlights_student_loan.htmlObama says his student-loan plan will save billions

“…The administration, in a background paper on the issue, said the program “lines the pockets of the banks who serve as middlemen while costing the American people $5 billion a year.”

About 76 percent of all federal student loans for the 2007- 2008 school year were issued through the FFEL program, according to America’s Student Loan Providers, an industry group whose members include SLM and Nelnet. The remaining 24 percent of new federal loans were made by the Education Department through the Direct Loan Program.

Under Obama’s proposal, all new federal loans would go through the Direct Loan Program. The Obama administration has said it expects to save $48 billion over 10 years, or more than $4 billion a year, by eliminating the FFEL program. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obama’s plan would save $94 billion over 10 years.

The savings would be redirected into student-aid programs such as Pell Grants for the neediest students and guarantee an annual increase that is tied to inflation.”

http://www.app.com/article/20090425/BUSINESS/904250310/1003/business 

 

Pell Grant

“…The Federal Pell Grant Program provides need-based grants to low-income undergraduate and certain postbaccalaureate students to promote access to postsecondary education. Students may use their grants at any one of approximately 5,400 participating postsecondary institutions. Grant amounts are dependent on: the student’s expected family contribution (EFC) (see below); the cost of attendance (as determined by the institution); the student’s enrollment status (full-time or part-time); and whether the student attends for a full academic year or less.

Students may not receive Federal Pell Grant funds from more than one school at a time. …”

http://www.ed.gov/programs/fpg/index.html

 

Pell Grant

“.The Pell Grant program is a type of post-secondary, educational federal grant program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. It is named after U.S. Senator Claiborne Pell[1] and originally known as the Basic Educational Opportunity Grant program. Grants, which do not require repayment, are awarded based on a “financial need” formula determined by the U.S. Congress using criteria submitted through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).

The Pell Grant is covered by legislation titled the Higher Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1; 20 U.S.C. 1070a.

Because of the high levels of need required to obtain a Pell Grant, receipt of them is often used by researchers as a proxy for low-income student attendance and to indicate the economic diversity of the student body.

The Pell Grant program is a type of post-secondary, educational federal grant program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. It is named after U.S. Senator Claiborne Pell[1] and originally known as the Basic Educational Opportunity Grant program. Grants, which do not require repayment, are awarded based on a “financial need” formula determined by the U.S. Congress using criteria submitted through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).

The Pell Grant is covered by legislation titled the Higher Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1; 20 U.S.C. 1070a.

Because of the high levels of need required to obtain a Pell Grant, receipt of them is often used by researchers as a proxy for low-income student attendance and to indicate the economic diversity of the student body.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 caps the Pell Grant’s award at $4,860 in the 2009-2010 school year.[2] Federal budget legislation passed in early 2006 cut the federal financial aid budget by $12.5 billion. While the maximum Pell Grant legislative limit was raised to $5,800 through 2011, maximum Pell Grant awards were not funded at this level. The maximum award available to students has been frozen at $4,050 since 2003-04.

For 2006-07, the maximum Pell Grant available to students was $4,050. For the award year of 2007-2008 the maximum Pell Grant award was $4,310. The maximum award for the 2008-09 award year (July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009) is $4,731. The maximum can change each award year and depends on program funding. The maximum grant is to increase to $5,400 by 2012.

Students with less need receive smaller amounts. Grant money can be used for tuition, fees, and education expenses (such as textbooks or required materials for a class).[3]

Due to high increases in the cost of post-secondary education and slow or no growth in the Pell Grant program, the value of Pell Grants has eroded significantly over time. In 2005-06, the maximum Pell Grant covered one-third of the yearly cost of higher education at a public four-year institution; twenty years ago, it covered 60% of a student’s cost of attendance. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pell_Grant

The Future of Federal Student Loans9

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The 12 Trillion–$12,000,000,000,000 Crime of The Century: The Decline and Fall of United States of America By Radical Socialist Spending–Look Before You Leap!

The Financial Crime of The Century: William K. Black On Massive Mortgage Fraud –Videos

Bailed Out Bank Trillion Dollar Derivative Exposure

The Mother of All Bailouts–2 to 3 Trillion Dollars–$2,000,000,000–$3,000,000,000!–Rewarding Greed, Arrogance and Stupidity–Pay for Play!

Federal Government Extortion Of Sound Banks–You Decide?–Take This TARP and Shove It!

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now! 

MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS ARE NOT WORTH THE MONEY DEBATE–Videos

Barack Obama’s Socialist Green Commissar Carol Browner

Let Them Eat Cake Act: American Elites Killing and Starving The American People

ANWR: Pristine–Pristine–Pristine–Desolute–Desolute–Desolute–Drill–Drill–Drill– McCain/Romney: Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less!

Clinton’s Cap and Trade Tax on The American People for Consuming Electricity and Driving Cars, SUVs and Trucks!

Facing Fundamental Facts

Presidential Election 2008: American Elites Vs. American People

Let Them Eat Cake Act: American Elites Killing and Starving The American People

The Heidelberg Appeal: Beware of False Gods and Prophets

Going Deep–Cool–Deep Ocean Water (DOW)–Ocean Power!

Saving The World: The Importance of Getting The Priorities Right

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Tea Parties Take Off In Texas–Spreading Nationwide–Are You Going To Washington Fair? Millions Celebrate The Second American Revolution–Saturday, July 4, 2009

Operation Family Freedom (OFF): Millions Celebrate Washington Fair, Saturday, July 4, 2009–The Second American Revolution  

Schiff, Forbers and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!

Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

The Empty Suit or Hollow Man–Barrack Obama–An Legend In His Own Mind

Cap and Trade Carbon Dioxide Tax: Gore’s and Obama’s Revenge on The American People–Let Them Freeze and Sweat!

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!

The Cost of Comprehensive Immigration Reform–McCain and Obama Are Hopeless–It is the Economy Stupid!

Presidential Candidates on Illegal Immigration, Criminal Alien Removal and Social Service Benefits

US Immigration Videos

Why immigration will be the number 1 political issue in the 2008 Presidential Election! — Gum Balls

One Big Awful Mistake America (OBAMA): Veterans Will Now Lead The Fight To Defeat Radical Socialism!

The Signed “Stimulus Package” Did Not Include Funding for E-Verify and Border Fence Construction–Less Jobs And Security for American Citizens

Inside the Meltdown: Who Was Withdrawing From Money Market Funds On September 16-18, 2008 and Why?

Bad Government Intervention Requires Bad Government Bank-The Road Map Out Of The World Economic Crisis–Stabilize–Stimulate–Strengthen–Simultaneously! 

President Obama’s Sales Pitch–Buy My Government Dependency Package–I Won The Election!–No Sale–The American People Want Their Money Back!

President Barack Obama Peddling The Government Dependency Package (GDP) and Fear Mongering The Raw Deal!

Pelosi’s Porky Pigout Poison Package–Economy Wrecker and Job Destroyer–Have A Blue Christmas 2009! 

BO’s Raw Deal: Obama’s Two Year Recession and Two Year Hyperinflation–Hopeless & Small Change!

Boycott Bailedout Businesses and Banks

Ban Bailouts–Stop Inflation Now (SIN)–Stop Socialism of Losses!

The Sovereign Wealth Fund Threat: Are Chinese Communists Behind Rush In Passing Bailout Bill?

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now!

Recession–Recession–Recession–Scaring People–Have A Hot Dog!

It Is Official–The U.S. Economy Has Been In A Recession for 11 Months and Continuing! 

 


Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

35 Responses to “US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments and Subsidies To Be Eliminated!”

RSS Feed for Pronk Palisades Comments RSS Feed

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Depar…May 7, 2009 […]

[…] US Federal Government Fails Stress Test–Insolvent: Time Has Arrived For Downsizing–Departments a… […]


Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: