Obama says. "Let's use the war savings for debt reduction." Too bad he does not want to put this in the form of an actual budget proposal. We should simply ignore him until he decides to play by the rules.

Obama tells Congress: Use war savings to pay down debt, rebuild nation

By Susan Crabtree - The Washington Times

President Obama used his weekly address to highlight his trip this week to Afghanistan and call on Congress to use half the money the nation is no longer spending on war to pay down our debt, and use the other half on infrastructure projects to help create jobs and spur the still-sputtering economy. . . . . . . .  

*******

Editor's notes:  This storyline gives emphasis to the notion that Obama is an inept bungler when it comes to financial matters.  

1.  He has no background in finance nor any formal/educational training regarding management and finance.  And when one is the head of a 3.8 trillion dollar "corporation,"  he simply cannot survive, professionally,  without proven experience.  The suggestion, above,  is so far removed from reality,  as to be embarrassing. 

2.  Why have "we" decided it is a sign of right wing extremism to demand that suggestions such as Obama's  be put in budget form,  run through both houses of congress,  scored by the CBO,  signed into law and implemented?  Such was the congressional process before Obama.  Such are the rules.   


So I say, "At least it is an idea; now let's play by the rules and write this suggestion into law."  Keep in mind that Obama is the first president in our 240 year history to have two budgets sent to Congress and not receive a single vote,  whether Republican or Democrat.  The first hand drafted Obama budget failed in a Democrat controlled Senate,  97 to nothing  (2011).  The second Obama budget, failed 414 to nothing in the House.  Incredibly, neither Nancy Pelosi nor Harry Reid voted for either of these Obama budgets.  Obviouly,  no one on The Hill thinks he knows his butt from his arm pit,  when it comes to formulating a budget.  

3.  Problem:  did I read Obama's suggestion correctly?  We take the money we are no longer spend fighting our wars, pay down the debt AND rebuild the nation?  Wow.  How much money does he think this is and what are his detailed plans for spending this money. 

The clowns at the Daily Beast claim we were spending 3 billion a week in 2010.  The Huffington Post claimed 8 billion a week,  in 2011,  when the Iraqi war was drastically diminished in terms of military involvement and annual cost . . . .  kind of a nutty figure presented to us by radical anti-war theorist who have every reason to stretch the truth.  

The best guess I could find is here,  and the number given is $200 billion over the course of a decade.  Keep in mind that we are looking at a war effort that has been drastically reduced.  

Using that number ,  contrast $200 billion in "savings" against 15 trillion in accumulative dept at the current rate of deficit spending and what do we have?  Answer:  we can see this $200 billion is so-called savings is completely swallowed up in the larger debt totals.  As a result,  unless and until we solve the over-all deficit issue,  there is no "extra" money to spend on anything. 

If this is too challenging to grasp,  think about this explanation:  200 billion over 10 years is 20 billion per year  --  money Obama says we can use to pay down the debt AND,  and,  rebuild America.  20 billion dollars per year.  Does he not know that we spend 492 billion dollars a year just on the interest payment for our national debt?  Again,  there is no money left over for anything.  This is why so many are screaming about the national debt.  It consumes every possible solution we might have.  It has to be dealt with, beginning now. 

Romney promises to work on this issue.  Obama has no plan, whatsoever, for dealing with our nation's number one problem.