Ask not what your government can do for you – there is a limit

The government has no business trying to run entitlement programs such as Obamacare – no business acumen whatsoever. Social Security is going bankrupt. As reported in 2010 in the New York Times, the program was already paying out more money than it had coming in (6 years before it was predicted to happen) with only IOUs in its so-called trust fund.

Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund expenditures have exceeded income annually since 2008 and are projected to continue doing so under current law in all future years. It could go bankrupt by 2016 according to Forbes. Obamacare is also scheduled to take $500 billion from Medicare funding exacerbating the problem.

The government’s welfare spending has grown by 32 percent over the past four years under President Obama, with his stimulus spending, his lackluster economic recovery and his removal of the work provisions of welfare, which have resulted in qualifying millions more for public assistance.

Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large–and growing–chunk of the more than 100 million recipients on some form of government assistance.


“Among the major means tested welfare programs, since 2000 Medicaid has increased from 34 million people to 54 million in 2011 and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) from 17 million to 45 million in 2011,” says the Senate Budget Committee. “Spending on food stamps alone is projected to reach $800 billion over the next decade.”

Federal spending on more than 80 low-income assistance programs reached $746  billion in 2011, and state spending on those programs brought the total to $1.03  trillion, according to figures from the Congressional Research Service and the Senate Budget Committee.

That makes welfare the single biggest chunk of federal spending — topping  Social Security and basic defense spending.

As a consequence of these programs the government shouldn’t be running, the country is going bankrupt and increasing its deficits by over $1 trillion per year under Obama, for a total of over $6 trillion dollars in less than five years, and another $6 trillion under Bush in his eight years.

The debt ceiling and the national debt have more than doubled under Bush and Obama – more than all preceding presidents combined and our government can no longer afford to spend money they don’t have.

Progressive politicians will once again go to the tax trough, because the government doesn’t have any money to pay on their credit cards, other than that confiscated from the taxpayers.

What do progressives think the maximum tax limit should be, if any, for all these programs? There isn’t enough money available from all the rich over $250,000, using all the assets and profits the Fortune 500 corporations to pay for the government for even a year at the current rate of spending without taxing all the people.

There is a limit on what government can do for you!

There’s no money left for all these entitlements, they are failed experiments and the country is at its financial limit, if we care anything for our children and grandchildren!



  1. CarolF964

    I’ve clearly said Fox News is one thing and their talking head shows another. The problems come from watchers not knowing the difference and accepting what the Hannity’s say as being factual.
    And guess what? Anything Fox News runs I see on CNN. The notion Fox has important news no other channel tells the public is their line of bull to make viewers feel important when they watch that network. I often watch CNN and than turn to Fox to see how both networks are presenting the same news item. Once tried Fox as my only news source for a full 30 days. Wow are they bad. Questions asked are definately slanted and most often non productive in news conferences compared to other networks. If I were a Conservative, I wouldn’t select them as my main source, I’d want so much better.
    When do you get firing facilities and doctors is a regular practice of insurance companies and not new to the gov program?
    It’s that basic lack of understanding as to how insurance has been working all these past years as to why you now have a gov program. When you have a program it will use limits as to how it will all work. How do you expect that will go without standards set?
    I would rather they had made the choice long ago to clean-up the insurance industry and we had no gov program needed at this point in time. It’s my understanding Conservatives don’t think you clean up an industry, you just allow it to make money and than cheer. What happens to the general public who use those services, or can’t get them, is their tough luck.
    There will be other doctors and facilities who will accept the prices insurance offers them. If that weren’t the truth, all the doctors etc. would have gone out of business long ago since that’s the way it’s operated in the past.
    The roll-out’s problems online belong to this President. His to fix.
    The REpublicans fault in the matter lies in saying the program would never roll-out and the young shouldn’t sign up for it but accept the fine.
    You’re saying “friends of Michelle” should have been left alone. You don’t give a source for it. Health care is far too important for mud slinging. A cartoon in the Sacramento Bee said this morning, showing an elephant & person, why didn’t we go back to the old ways where you got sick, went broke, and just died? Lots of truth in that cartoon.
    I doubt all of us think the new way is perfection that doesn’t need a tune-up, but it sure beats the old one.

    • Ted Biondo

      Carol, how much did CNN cover the IRS and Benghazi scandals – hardly, if at all!

      Also, the new healthcare system will not beat the old one, which was based on the free enterprise system, versus the coerced Obamacare that will eventually force everyone to a single-payer, socialized health system, when insurance companies and doctors decide to quit accepting patients that are in a system with no incentive to provide care. Medical providers will start their own private systems which will create even a larger gap between those who can afford healthcare and those who can not.

  2. So a single-payer socialized health system is just peachy for everyone 65 and older but a disaster for everyone else? Doctors accept patients, they don’t “except” them.

    • No, Azguy, Social Security isn’t “peachy”. It, too, is a government-mandated program. Most people would be better off with a free-market insurance system. At least then, more doctors would provide care.

      • JRM_CommonSense

        Sorry SNuss, my guess is Azguy is not talking about Social Security. Besides, Want to try again?

  3. Carol, you never give any sources, so you attack me for not?
    All I ever read is your day dreaming opinions.
    This has to be the least transparent administration in history and they have had the MSM on their side since Obama elected.

  4. CarolF964

    Thanks for your source. Read it and I must say I’m not sure how being in the same class at university and belonging to the same group, gets you a gov contract? Since when is the First Lady in charge of that kind of business?
    It’s these kinds of things that keeps both sides from being able to work together on the issue of healthcare in this nation.
    Next some fool will be telling people the seeds used in the First Lady’s veggie garden came from a company where a classmate from where she attended college works and so that’s a scandal. If you think back, there’s been a good deal of nasty things said about this First Lady.
    Let’s just file this away in that place where ugly rumors live that shouldn’t be worth repeating because our mother’s taught us early in life not to gossip or repeat unkind things about people we don’t even know.

    • Common Carol, this is how things work (to quote you), don’t be naive, follow the money.

      “CGI Federal is a subsidiary of Montreal-based CGI Group. With offices in Fairfax, Va., the subsidiary has been a darling of the Obama administration, which since 2009 has bestowed it with $1.4 billion in federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov.

      In comparison, in 2008, under President George W. Bush, CGI contracts totaled only $16.5 million for all federal departments and agencies.

      It’s not like CGI Federal could be confused with a good company. There were plenty of warnings throughout the whole process that the whole thing was not going to work.

      When Canadian officials in Ontario ran into the same problem with CGI… they fired it.”

      “First Lady Michelle Obama and her Princeton classmate whose company received the no-bid government contract to build the HealthCare.gov Obamacare website were both members of a black student organization that caused a tense scene on campus by inviting a PLO leader who advocated for terrorism.

      Michelle Obama ’85 and her classmate Toni Townes-Whitley ’85, a senior vice president at CGI Federal, were both students at the university when their groups the Organization of Black Unity (OBU) and the Third World Center (TWC) engaged in a confrontation with Jewish students on campus.

      Michelle Obama was a member of both the OBU and TWC during her time at Princeton (1981-85). Townes-Whitley also belonged to OBU and TWC.”

      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/28/michelle-obama-and-cgi-federal-executive-belonged-to-student-group-at-princeton-that-hosted-pro-terrorist-speaker/#ixzz2j14Rrual

    • Carol, pure coincidence right?

      “The Department of Health and Human Services reviewed only CGI’s bid for the Obamacare account. CGI was one of 16 companies qualified under the Bush administration to provide certain tech services to the federal government. A senior vice president for the company testified last week before The House Committee on Energy and Commerce that four companies submitted bids, but did not name those companies or explain why only CGI’s bid was considered.”

      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/29/michelles-friend-at-cgi-federal-met-with-top-officials-at-white-house/#ixzz2j9NnfYLD

  5. CarolF964

    They covered both items you’ve named very well. Not only on the regular news shows but on the other shows where panels talk about the issue being covered.
    They did ask the difficult questions about how long would it have taken to get help during that attack on Benghazi and the responsibility of Hilary Clinton, as Secretary of State, in that matter? They also covered the responsibility of the host gov in protecting that facility and their lack of help in allowing the U.S. to properly investigate the matter using the FBI. Covered the paperwork left behind and properly gave respect to those who died.
    As for the Medical you feel works so well the old way, you may have that opinion,but I don’t share it. As I’ve said many times, I’ve had medical coverage and not had it, so I understand both sides of the healthcare coin. What I don’t understand is why it’s acceptable to you to have people in need of care in this country and not be upset they can’t get it.? To keep to the old ways and make no effort to solve this problem?
    If the old way was all that good, than the stats wouldn’t tell you that 50% of us will be diabetics by the age of 60 and have all the health problems that go with it. And they are costly ones, Ted.
    Your middle class is shrinking and not getting good healthcare right now. When these folks hit Medicare age, the costs will be quite large to handle. That alone should scare the socks off of you into looking more closely at how more people get better and regular healthcare.
    You keep looking at the gov as the problem and not the old healthcare system run by the insurance companies. Keep in mind when your head is in the sand, your tail feathers are ripe for the kicking. How many times do the American People have to tell Republican/Tea Party Conservatives, they are unhappy with the old way with healthcare and want it done differently before you listen?
    Your last candidate for the White House wasn’t dumb or inept, and he had put a healthcare program into his State that was working well. What he did do was carry the party line about healthcare, entitlement programs, etc., from coast to coast, and lost the trust of the American People who felt they couldn’t trust your party with matters they felt really effected their lives, like healthcare.
    Personally, I feel most Americans would rather not have a gov program, but since the insurance companies outrageous behaviors were never addressed and solved, Obamacare will do nicely. It beats going broke trying to treat cancers etc., and not being able to get medical care unless it’s an emergency.
    Your party’s message about spending wasn’t wrong in the campaign, it was just people would like to think they are more important than the dollars they produce. We already have very large medical providers with their own systems, and that wasn’t the solution.
    Guess some of us keep trying to say things need to change and some just keep pretending everything is OK. Didn’t they do that down south with schools in the 1050’s? The old way was just OK? Medicare in the 1960’s and the old way was just OK?
    The volunteer Army, but he old way was just OK?

  6. Carol, I bet you were one of those who chastised Bush for no bid contracts with Halliburton when there were no qualified alternatives.

    I am pretty sure there are lots of software vendors more qualified than CGI. So I guess you have no issue with them no-bidding this and choosing a vendor rated as fair and who failed in Canada?
    Tells me that padding their cronies pockets was more important than delivering a first rate product for the American people.

    “Obama just kept throwing more taxpayer money at CGI. And the entire ObamaCare setup was reserved for only one company.

    Federal officials considered only one firm to design the Obamacare health insurance exchange website that has performed abysmally since its Oct. 1 debut.

    Rather than open the contracting process to a competitive public solicitation with multiple bidders, officials in the Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid accepted a sole bidder, CGI Federal, the U.S. subsidiary of a Canadian company with an uneven record of IT pricing and contract performance.

    CMS officials are tight-lipped about why CGI was chosen or how it happened. They also refuse to say if other firms competed with CGI, or if there was ever a public solicitation for building Healthcare.gov, the backbone of Obamacare’s problem-plagued web portal.

    Instead, it appears they used what amounts to a federal procurement system loophole to award the work to the Canadian firm.

    CGI was a much smaller vendor when it was approved by HHS in 2007. With the approval, CGI became eligible for multiple awards without public notice and in circumvention of the normal competitive bidding procurement process.

    There is no evidence CMS issued any public solicitation for the Obamacare website contract.

    This smells bad. No, it outright stinks. And it merits a serious investigation. Why did Obama Inc. suddenly begin tossing a ton of work to CGI and practically reserve ObamaCare for them?

    General Accountability Office acting counsel Linda H. Gibson noted that at the time CMS officials had only rated some of CGI’s previous services as “fair.”

  7. CarolF964

    I’m not saying you don’t have the right to question the contract process. Be my guest. Go for it. I feel you’ll be amazed at how gov. does business and the regulations involved.
    What I clearly said was to throw in the First Lady was your problem.
    Read your response and note what you’ve said this time compared to what you said the last time. Big difference.
    I use to try to tell elected officials in the village where I lived there in Illinois, they needn’t accept the lowest bid on a contract, but to take the bid for the company that could prove with experience, equipment, etc., they were the best qualified.
    That sounds reasonable, right?
    What I was told was it’s too difficult to prove the cheapest bidder wasn’t qualified even if their work record showed a low rating for that kind of work. So the Village often got lousy work done that needed to be redone.
    I’ll remind you the President wanted to change how contracts were awarded in his first term of office. He didn’t much co-oporation in the matter.
    Do you think this one has been big and bad enough to get both sides to make some much needed changes?
    Now if this is just more politics, you won’t go past President bashing.
    If this is truly the straw that broke the camel’s back in how we award contracts that end up wasteful messes, you’ll have ideas for changes and write your Congressman. Ask your local city how they do it and try to make changes there as well.

  8. Carol, lowest bidder? How about no bidders.
    What does a small town in Illinois have to do with the no bid contract given to a sub performing company connect to the Obama’s?
    “I’ll remind you the President wanted to change how contracts were awarded in his first term of office. He didn’t much co-oporation in the matter.”
    He did? “You don’t give a source for it.”

    He also said there would be “the most transparent administration in history”

    He also claimed he wouldn’t hire lobbyists.

  9. As a matter of FACT……..

    The White House garden plants were first grown in government greenhouses, and then transplanted to the White House grounds. Neither Michelle, nor her children, take care of it (except for photo ops. It was left unattended during the shutdown).

  10. CarolF964

    If you understand how your local gov. works, you can better understand all the layers of gov up.
    As for the no bid contract. Are you sure that’s what happened or was it with the restrictions of the contract, there was only one bidder? Department of Health & Services would have put out the contract, why don’t you inquire of them?
    The First Lady doesn’t tend the Roses in the Rose Garden either.
    Doesn’t cook the big meals for visiting diplomats, nor make the gingerbread replica of the White House we see at the Christmas Holidays. Washing Windows isn’t on her list of to do’s as well.

    • Carol, well this transparent administration won’t share that information, but I am pretty sure was because of the restrictions set up by the administration to give it to political cronies. I mean if you follow the solar money and now this it is quite clear to those who don’t where Obama blinders.

      “Federal officials considered only one firm to design the Obamacare health insurance exchange website that has performed abysmally since its Oct. 1 debut.

      Rather than open the contracting process to a competitive public solicitation with multiple bidders, officials in the Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid accepted a sole bidder, CGI Federal, the U.S. subsidiary of a Canadian company with an uneven record of IT pricing and contract performance.

      CMS officials are tight-lipped about why CGI was chosen or how it happened. They also refuse to say if other firms competed with CGI, or if there was ever a public solicitation for building Healthcare.gov, the backbone of Obamacare’s problem-plagued web portal.

      Instead, it appears they used what amounts to a federal procurement system loophole to award the work to the Canadian firm.”

      Carol, I often wonder if you know how anything really works.

  11. BTW, Medicare is forecast to go bankrupt in 2016.

    Trustees: Medicare Will Go Broke in 2016, If You Exclude Obamacare’s Double-Counting

    he Trustees of the Medicare program have released their annual report on the solvency of the program. They calculate that the program is “expected to remain solvent until 2024, the same as last year’s estimate.” But what that headline obfuscates is that Obamacare’s tax increases and spending cuts are counted towards the program’s alleged “deficit-neutrality,” Medicare is to go bankrupt in 2016. And if you listen to Medicare’s own actuary, Richard Foster, the program’s bankruptcy could come even sooner than that.

    Read more at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/04/23/trustees-medicare-will-go-broke-in-2016-if-you-exclude-obamacares-double-counting/

    Another reason not to trust big government.

  12. More proof that the Lamestream media is finally seeing the light of truth…

    NBC SHOCK REPORT: Obama Administration Knew MILLIONS Would Not Keep Their Health Insurance

    Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, October 28, 2013, 5:51 PM

    We heard it a hundred times before Obamacare was rammed through Congress.
    Barack Obama promised Americans that if you like your healthcare plan you can keep your plan.

    It was all a lie. Period.

    White House Admits: Some Will Lose Health Plans…
    Nearly 1.5 million cancellations so far…

    NBC is reporting that the Obama administration knew years ago that millions of Americans would lose their health insurance.
    NBC Investigations reported:

    President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

    Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

    Read more, see the video, at: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/10/nbc-shock-report-obama-administration-knew-millions-of-americans-would-not-keep-their-health-insurance/

  13. @ Ted:

    On a somewhat related topic, can you think of any reason why the Dept. of Education needs armed agents on their staff? They aren’t putting them in schools, to protect the children.

    School of hard Glocks: the Department of Education’s growing gun library

    Equipment Issued to Department of Education OIG

    Since October 2001, the enforcement wing of the Department of Education has issued Glock pistols to its special agents as a matter of course, according to documents obtained by MuckRock. The department has continued building out its arsenal and expanding its agents’ weapons selection using discounted law enforcement rates offered to the U.S. Capitol Police and the ATF.

    The purchase orders and documents provided to MuckRock user Scriven King— which date back seven years – indicate that the Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General has purchased more than 200 Glocks for its special agents since 2006, spending more than $80,000 on pistols in that span. The OIG also spent $17,000.79 on Remington shotguns in September 2010, according to another purchase order.

    Read more at: https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2013/oct/24/school-hard-glocks-department-educations-gun-colle/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *