This article got my blood boiling

A few presidents have tried to balance the budget and find out where the money is going. Ronald Reagan in the 1980's and Bill Clinton in the 1990's. Neither one could find where all the money is at. I do not expect they would be able to trace it all, but I do expect they would have been able to trace a majority of the money, at least up to 88-99% of it. I don't think they were able to get that high a percentage. Both failed, both said they simply cannot find it.

Rose - It is not that difficult if records have been maintained. May be they could have a category "unaccounted" and try to further look into this perhaps?

@stowyk - That article has given figures that account for salaries which is a pittance compared to the total debt!

Hi all I can really see the Marxism at work here,"take from the rich first". When are we going to wake up and see that this just what Obama, Pelosi, and Read want. Divide and conquer, Has always been the Liberal way, we are doing just what they want us to do when we should be trying to think of a way to get the powers that be to find a solution for the long term. I don't know what it is but if we all think about it surely some one could come up with an idea.

14 trillion, how did we get there? I think is was because the people we elected to do our will decided that we were not smart and started to spend money the country did not have. As to some other country taking over I will not see that, They will kill me so I won't see it.

We got there first of all with the war. It costs a lot of money to go to war. Even police actions with our military cost buku bucks. That is a nice portion of it. Here is an article about public debt: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/history/history.htm There are a couple of good articles there. I have been trying to find out what exactly our debt consists of, other than war. That does seem to be the biggest piece of the pie. During every war, the debt has increased. But, war is not the only reason, as the debt has steadily increased, with brief decreases, throughout the country's inception. I tried to answer your question, but I just don't know where to look for the answer.

Hi Ronaldinu, it is great to see you posting again. I love the statement: Some people know their rights more than they know their duties. That is a classic, and unfortunately so very true. There will always be beggars for sure, but I do believe this system is creating them rather than helping people to be industrious and have some pride in themselves and their accomplishments.

I do agree, we do give a great deal. May I bring up something to you? Charities are not making what they were before the financial crisis. People who were giving are now in need. Some charities are yet doing ok, such as certain food banks. But, say you are on a special diet. Have you ever gone to a food bank, just to see the kind of food they are giving away? It is boxed and canned, not good for people with heart problems, high cholesterol and some of it is not good for diabetics. Some do offer fresh food in season, but our seasons are short. There is no meat at most facilities. For people without health problems, it is ok to get by on, but for people who have health issues, well, they simply cannot eat most of that food. then again, when I go shopping and see what people on foodstamps buy, I am appalled. I began playing a game in my head when I got in the checkout. That person ahead of me has decent food, they are not on stamps. The person in front has a lot of junk food and soda, they have a bridgecard. You know, I am usually right. It would be great if they could prevent people from buying junk on the bridgecard. I doubt seriously our economy will completely fail, at least at this time. There are safeguards in place to prevent that from happening. We may end up in another recession,(or should I say an extended depression) but the economy will not completely fail. When the market crashed in 1929 the governing bodies did develop safety nets to prevent that from happening again. Our money may continue to lose value, but it will not be completely worthless. We do need to curb our spending habits. Combining departments is in order, and even totally eradicating some and developing a whole new system is needed. It would be great if we could just wipe the slate clean and start from scratch, but the government is too large to be able to do that. It is a shame when a state cannot even balance their budget, let alone an entire nation. Part of the problem we have is too many agencies getting our money. We have too many on the government payroll, and that adds up, including retirement benefits, etc. I would like to see the extremely wealthy be able to refuse their social security checks if they want to. Remember McCain several years back was complaining about getting a check? He said I'm a millionaire, I don't need this. Give this check to someone who needs it. They kept sending them anyway, and told him they cannot stop sending the checks. Maybe they can stop sending the social security checks to people that make over 6 grand a month? I think the flat tax rate is a wonderful idea. I just wonder....the money the state and federal government take out of payroll is placed in a bank and gains interest. They hold it for a year, and give a portion back. I wonder how much the interest the government is getting? Even so, the flat tax is probably a much better idea. No loopholes for anyone. Ah, but what about the corporations and companies? If they are taxed without loopholes, they will go where ever they can go, where they will not have to pay such high taxes. Do we give them a break, in hopes they stay on our soil and employ American workers?

First, i agree that Charities are not making as much, but the ones locally are getting creative. I know that people with food restrictions are hurt by this. I think that the LINK, SNAP or whatever your praticular areas supplemental card is called should be limited in what it can buy. It should not be able to buy all the junk that I see in carts most days when I am shopping. social security, it seems, is not going to change how it gives out money, including those making more in retirement than my husband and I combined make in several months still getting money from the government, and that is just wrong. But people like John McCain can take the 20 minutes a month to give that money away themselves (or their spouses can do it if they are too busy). It can go to the charity of their own choosing that helps close to home. The tax thing was just one idea that I saw a feesible and a more fair way to do it. As for businesses, give them tax breaks if they bring jobs back to our economy.

Exactly! If they are so concerned about the knowledge people are not getting, then why not educate rather than insult and degrade them for their lack of understanding. After all, the news media was pushing it down our throats about not getting the checks. Most people thought that was true! I do not know of any local news station that I watched, who told us they could not withhold checks.

It would be awesome to have a local group be able to provide the needs to those who are struggling, instead of having the big corporate government handle it. What a shame the woman held her child back from receiving a quality education over a lousy pittance. There are many out there like that. Lord have mercy.