Where’s the money gone?

[oldtimerdiscopants]

It's a big question "Where is the money?" and a good question, i admit to not knowing anything about how much we have whether it's distributed properly or even how to answer it.

 

[NorCalBlue]

Where's the money? I think I read that Raheem's getting most of it.

 

[nellyonthewing]

Capitalists want to keep all the money they earn for themselves whereas Socialists want to give it all to those that didn't earn it. Either way the vast majority of us get screwed.

 

[KnaresboroughBlue]

Public sector and dealing with government debt would be my guess but I'm no economist.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

Until the general public wise up to governments siphoning tax payers money into private defense companies, nothing will change.

 

[bluesteel]

Until the general public wise up to governments siphoning tax payers money into private defense companies, nothing will change.

It's a bit bigger than that, we simply spend more than we earn, we always have, certain governments have just borrowed more and ignored it. This one is trying to cut back, the right thing to do financially, to the detriment of everyone. Too little too late IMO.

 

[abu13]

Politicians fault.

Yep.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Until the general public wise up to governments siphoning tax payers money into private defense companies, nothing will change.

Facts say otherwise, but then I have no political agenda.

Facts have been presented, but they’re not sexy and don’t really play into the conspiracy theories most would like. Real answers are boring. Does that mean some people (infinitesimally small fraction in all likelihood) are NOT getting money they shouldn’t have? Absolutely not!

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

Facts say otherwise, but then I have no political agenda.

Facts have been presented, but they’re not sexy and don’t really play into the conspiracy theories most would like. Real answers are boring. Does that mean some people (infinitesimally small fraction in all likelihood) are NOT getting money they shouldn’t have? Absolutely not!

So you do not correlate the fact that the US spends $600 billion annually of taxpayers money but cannot afford to provide healthcare for it's citizens ?

 

[ChicagoBlue]

It's a bit bigger than that, we simply spend more than we earn, we always have, certain governments have just borrowed more and ignored it. This one is trying to cut back, the right thing to do financially, to the detriment of everyone. Too little too late IMO.

The problem is that governments that cut expenses don’t get re-elected, and governments that cut revenues do. The PUBLIC and GOVERNMENTS often don’t work in their own best interests.

It is common in the US for Republicans to overspend and undertax, then Democrats come in and have to try to fix it, which is difficult, because NO ONE likes their taxes increased.

As is common on both sides of the pond, PUBLIC SYSTEMS AND PUBLIC SYSTEM PENSION COSTS are outpacing any hope of revenue increases!

During periods of economic growth, tax revenues increase. During this period, government EXPENDITURE INCREASES need to be reined in as much as possible, so those increased revenues are available for use during periods of economic contraction, when revenues are reduced. However, the pervasive mentality is spend more when times are flush and borrow when times are bad. When will we run out of other peoples money? No one knows, but we do know it won’t get cheaper with time!