Club Fed: The world leader in budget reporting fraud!


The bottom line here is that no one, repeat NO ONE is morally
obligated to pay taxes to ANY government that lies and deceives the
public in the manner described below. Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia --
all are rank amateurs compared to Club Fed and the predatory behavior
of the parasitic political class.

On top of all this, they refuse to do one of the very few legitimate
things they are required to do: protect our borders!

The finest, most just calamity that could befall the vastly fraudulent
U.S. Government would be a massive, grassroots tax payment moratorium.
Fortunately, more and more people are getting the same idea!

BTW -- this problem has little to do with which party is in power.
BOTH parties are guilty of despicable lies and fraud.

It is long past time to simply stop paying them!

========================================================
Club Feds' budget tricks hide trillions in debt

Every year, tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars are quietly
added to the national debt -- on top of the deficits that we hear
about. What's going on here?

When it comes to financial magic, the government of the United States
takes the prize. Sleights of hand and clever distractions by purveyors
of line-of-credit mortgages, living-benefit variable annuities and
equity-indexed life insurance are clumsy parlor tricks compared with
the Big Magic of American politicians.

Consider the proud trumpeting that came from Washington at the close
of fiscal 2007. The deficit for the unified budget was, politicians
crowed, down to a mere $162.8 billion.

In fact, our government is overspending at a far greater rate. The
total federal debt actually increased by $497.1 billion over the same
period.

But politicians of both parties use happy numbers to distract us.
Democrats routinely criticize the Republican administration for
crippling deficits, but they politely use the least-damaging figure,
the $162.8 billion. Why? Because references to more-realistic
accounting would reveal vastly greater numbers and implicate both
parties.

Talk back: What worries you most about the national debt?

You can understand how this is done by taking a close look at a single
statement on federal finance from the president's Council of Economic
Advisers. The September statement shows that the "on-budget" numbers
produced a deficit of $344.3 billion in fiscal 2007. The "off-budget"
numbers had a surplus of $181.5 billion. (The off-budget figures are
dominated by Social Security, Medicare and other programs with trust
funds.)

Combine those two figures and you get the unified budget, that $162.8
billion. In the past eight years we've had two years of reported
surpluses and six years of reported deficits. Altogether, the total
reported deficit has run $1.3 trillion.

Some numbers don't add up
But if you examine another figure, the gross federal debt, you'll see
something strange. First, the debt has increased in each of the past
eight years, even in the two years when surpluses were reported.
Second, the gross federal debt, which includes the obligations held by
the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, has increased much
faster than the deficits -- about $3.3 trillion over the same eight
years.

That's $2 trillion more than the reported $1.3 trillion in deficits
over the period. Can you spell "Enron"?

In other words, while our reported deficits averaged $164 billion over
the past eight years, government debt increased an average of $418
billion a year. That's a lot more than twice as much.

How could this happen?

Easy. The Treasury Department simply credits the Social Security,
Medicare and other trust funds with interest payments in the form of
new Treasury obligations. No cash is actually paid. The trust funds
magically increase in value with a bookkeeping entry. It represents
money the government owes itself.

So what happens if we take out the funny money?

When the imaginary interest payments are included, Social Security and
Medicare are running at a tranquilizing surplus (that $181.5 billion
mentioned earlier). But measure actual cash, and the surplus
disappears.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Debate honestly or shut the hell up!

Posted (and possibly paraphrased) with permission. Following the
example set by other posters in this and other groups, the creator
of this post has withheld the author/source of the article above
because the author/source is not relevant to the merit of the
article's content -- except to whining liberals and big State
collaborators who have no intellectual, emotional or moral
capacity to HONESTLY refute, support or expand on the points made in
the article! Since they "feeeel" that the article ideas are "wrong",
but cannot logically refute them, their typical response is to attack
the author, source or poster. Withholding attribution denies these
pathetic, intellectually dysfunctional critics the opportunity to
attack anything BUT the content or the poster. Attacking ANYTHING BUT
the article content is evidence that you have already lost the debate.

Now watch this folks. Some of the pedantic, anal, nitpicking liberals
here who care more for red herring allegations of plagiarism than the
actual content of the debate will now expend some of the precious,
irreplaceable (thank God) time of their pathetic lives in identifying
the author of this piece (it's not the poster) and then whine and
squeal about anything BUT the content. It's really comical to watch.

(SourceCode: 10139)
.