Federal Welfare Spending to Skyrocket 80 Percent in Next Decade

[jimnyc]

The new America, where the government coddles and raises everyone. This is too much. They need a serious overhaul on this crap and cut the leaches and frauds loose.


Federal welfare spending will skyrocket 80 percent over the next decade, according to new analysis by the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee. Here's a chart, provided by the committee, detailing the growth in spending:

http://i.imgur.com/e1QtN.jpg

"This chart displays projected federal spending on federal welfare programs over the next ten years, based on data from the Congressional Research Service and Congressional Budget Office," the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee explains. "These figures do not count state contributions to federal welfare programs (primarily on low-income health assistance) which brought total welfare spending in FY2011 to more than $1 trillion – dwarfing any other budget item including Medicare and Social Security, and totaling enough to mail every household in poverty a check for 60k each year."

Currently, 95% of spending on means-tested poverty assistance falls into four categories: cash assistance, health assistance, housing assistance, and social and family services. Welfare spending has increased on a year-over-year basis regardless of whether the economy has improved or unemployment has declined, and is projected to continue this dramatic rise indefinitely. Spending on these poverty programs will rise approximately 80% from FY2013-FY2022, representing a total cost of $11 trillion – roughly one quarter of cumulative federal spending. Slowing the growth rate from 80% to a still massive 60% would thus result, according to standard congressional budget accounting, in a $1 trillion savings over ten years.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/federal-welfare-spending-skyrocket-80-percent-next-decade_696026.html

[Robert A Whit]

The new America, where the government coddles and raises everyone. This is too much. They need a serious overhaul on this crap and cut the leaches and frauds loose.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/federal-welfare-spending-skyrocket-80-percent-next-decade_696026.html


I am hoping that finally we may see a lot of this on public TV.

I wish PBS would show that graph.

I doubt the big 3 TV networks plan to show that.

CSPAN owes this to us to show it.

Trouble is that Obama drowns out the media that is not for him.

That son of a bucket stays camped on the TV stations. Not a day passes that on my local news they don't feature him.

With Bush, we saw him from time to time.

This Obama dude lives on TV. He is the Dr. Phil of politics or *sumpthing* like that.

[Trigg]

The people receiving assistance are voting for their benefit, not the benefit of the country or the next generation.

Dems know this, which is why they dust off the welfair rolls whenever they need to "get out the vote".

This country is in trouble. We're broke and no one cares.

The MSM just pulls out the dog and pony show in order to keep the masses entertained and not looking at the REAL news.

[mundame]

The people receiving assistance are voting for their benefit, not the benefit of the country or the next generation.

Dems know this, which is why they dust off the welfair rolls whenever they need to "get out the vote".

This country is in trouble. We're broke and no one cares.

The MSM just pulls out the dog and pony show in order to keep the masses entertained and not looking at the REAL news.

I agree. Sure, just keep raising the debt limit, more and more and more, feeding all the welfare entitlements till we fall into total fiscal confusion and collapse like Spain has.

I would love to see the debt limit NOT raised.

[Trigg]

I agree. Sure, just keep raising the debt limit, more and more and more, feeding all the welfare entitlements till we fall into total fiscal confusion and collapse like Spain has.

I would love to see the debt limit NOT raised.

I hope they don't raise it. We MUST live within our means.

It's amazing to me that the MSM keeps ignoring the video of bambam back when Bush wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Saying "raising the limit shows a lack of leadership".

If it gets raised this will be the SECOND time that his administration has done so.

[mundame]

I hope they don't raise it. We MUST live within our means.

It's amazing to me that the MSM keeps ignoring the video of bambam back when Bush wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Saying "raising the limit shows a lack of leadership".

If it gets raised this will be the SECOND time that his administration has done so.


Oh, that video and quotes from it are going around. I was rather shocked by that one and many others in which Obama said exactly the opposite on the Senate floor than during his presidency.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I hope they don't raise it. We MUST live within our means.

It's amazing to me that the MSM keeps ignoring the video of bambam back when Bush wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Saying "raising the limit shows a lack of leadership".

If it gets raised this will be the SECOND time that his administration has done so.

According to liberals, it's only a lack of leadership if a Republican does it.

[jimnyc]

http://i.imgur.com/dRJvM.jpg

[MtnBiker]

This is exactly what democrats want. The more low information government dependent voters there are, the better for democrats. It just depends on a person's perspective. That chart could actually be good news.

[bingster]

http://i.imgur.com/dRJvM.jpg

It's a good point but not a fair comparison. I would doubt that a single congressman out there hasn't voted against the debt ceiling at one time or another in protest against a current administration. When you know your vote won't change something, you have that luxury.

Republicans seem to be threatening to all out stop the debt ceiling from raising. That is a huge difference. They have the power to do this and that is incredibly irresponsible.

[jimnyc]

It's a good point but not a fair comparison. I would doubt that a single congressman out there hasn't voted against the debt ceiling at one time or another in protest against a current administration. When you know your vote won't change something, you have that luxury.

Republicans seem to be threatening to all out stop the debt ceiling from raising. That is a huge difference. They have the power to do this and that is incredibly irresponsible.

If you want to be president of the USA, you shouldn't be caught stepping over your own words from the past. Someone who is presidential should have beliefs on the economy, and stay with it, not flip flop when politically advantageous.

[bingster]

If you want to be president of the USA, you shouldn't be caught stepping over your own words from the past. Someone who is presidential should have beliefs on the economy, and stay with it, not flip flop when politically advantageous.

You're right, it was a good catch. If you want to play the hypocrisy game, though, go ahead and give me a name of any politician or president and I'll bet I can find proof of their hypocrisy in a 10 minute web search. Nobody is perfect.

This isn't a very intelligent conversation, though. We really can't NOT raise the debt ceiling. It's not like a credit limit, it's a debt limit. If we don't raise the limit we will default on our debts and cause major consequences on the world economy. We are required to pay our bills (14th amendment) . Not raising the debt limit can not happen.

[jimnyc]

You're right, it was a good catch. If you want to play the hypocrisy game, though, go ahead and give me a name of any politician or president and I'll bet I can find proof of their hypocrisy in a 10 minute web search. Nobody is perfect.

This isn't a very intelligent conversation, though. We really can't NOT raise the debt ceiling. It's not like a credit limit, it's a debt limit. If we don't raise the limit we will default on our debts and cause major consequences on the world economy. We are required to pay our bills (14th amendment) . Not raising the debt limit can not happen.

It CAN happen and should, IMO. Raising the limit is just saying "spend more". They should reel in spending, not increase it.

[Kathianne]

It CAN happen and should, IMO. Raising the limit is just saying "spend more". They should reel in spending, not increase it.

$100 billion increase=$100 billion in cuts.

Only way to bring some sanity into the conversation. The idea of 'no cuts tied to debt ceiling' is absurd and irresponsible.

[bingster]

It CAN happen and should, IMO. Raising the limit is just saying "spend more". They should reel in spending, not increase it.

Are you just being facetious? The money is already spent. The debt limit is just to pay for the money the Congress has already spent. It has to go up.

[Kathianne]

Are you just being facetious? The money is already spent. The debt limit is just to pay for the money the Congress has already spent. It has to go up.

No 'increase' without same number of 'decrease.'' That is what Fitch and others are looking for, real stop of increase in spending.

[red states rule]

The people receiving assistance are voting for their benefit, not the benefit of the country or the next generation.

Dems know this, which is why they dust off the welfair rolls whenever they need to "get out the vote".

This country is in trouble. We're broke and no one cares.

The MSM just pulls out the dog and pony show in order to keep the masses entertained and not looking at the REAL news.

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/130116hibaracko%20RGB20130116103125.jpg

[red states rule]

Are you just being facetious? The money is already spent. The debt limit is just to pay for the money the Congress has already spent. It has to go up.

So you never cut back on your spending? You have never decided NOT to spend money for something you had previously were going to purchase? Of course Dems have not passed a budget in 4 years so it would be hard to decide what to cut when you have no clue on how much you are spending

[red states rule]

The new America, where the government coddles and raises everyone. This is too much. They need a serious overhaul on this crap and cut the leaches and frauds loose.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/federal-welfare-spending-skyrocket-80-percent-next-decade_696026.html

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/81_12551420130115011402.jpg

[red states rule]

No 'increase' without same number of 'decrease.'' That is what Fitch and others are looking for, real stop of increase in spending.

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb0117cd20130116110345.jpg

[red states rule]

So you never cut back on your spending? You have never decided NOT to spend money for something you had previously were going to purchase? Of course Dems have not passed a budget in 4 years so it would be hard to decide what to cut when you have no clue on how much you are spending

***crieckets chirping***

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Are you just being facetious? The money is already spent. The debt limit is just to pay for the money the Congress has already spent. It has to go up.

You mean the money not voted on has been spent by obama. borrowed money spent without having be approved by a budget vote.
Any curiosity at all why no budget has been voted on during obama's first 4 years!>>
Could it be so he could spend and put us another 6 trillion into debt? Just a hunch,,
what say ye>>
Your way he gets all the credit and glory for any perceived good but never an ounce of blame for anything negative. Thats called insanity and blindness by most people ..--Tyr

[red states rule]

You mean the money not voted on has been spent by obama. borrowed money spent without having be approved by a budget vote.
Any curiosity at all why no budget has been voted on during obama's first 4 years!>>
Could it be so he could spend and put us another 6 trillion into debt? Just a hunch,,
what say ye>>
Your way he gets all the credit and glory for any perceived good but never an ounce of blame for anything negative. Thats called insanity and blindness by most people ..--Tyr

Eh Obama has sent budgets to Congress and NOT A SINGLE DEM ever voted for it. R's have sent budgets to the Senate but Reid never offered his budget. And libs cannot blame R's as budgets only need 51 votes to pass a budget. The fact is Dems do NOT want their fingerprints on any budget with trillion dollar deficits. They are contact to shrug and blame R's for the deficit. Dems are happy to ignore the Constitutional duties and Bingster is happy to ignore these facts