(This page initially accompanied the main index page. It was given its own space [03/29/08] to decrease the main index page length.)
2017 - U.S. National Debt? - January 1st, 2017: Over 19 trillion dollars? (See link) *Link: http://www.usdebtclock.org/*Trivia: [Former link used (this site) was www.brillig.com/debt_clock. It now appears "forbidden" on some servers.]
*Trivia: "Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress Wednesday [09/20/07] that the government will hit the current debt ceiling on Oct. 1. [....] The limit is $8.965 trillion. [....] This month , the Senate Finance Committee approved increasing the limit on the debt to $9.82 trillion. That boost of $850 billion would be the fifth since President George W. Bush took office in 2001. [....] The national debt is the total accumulation of annual budget deficits, which must be financed with borrowed money. [....]"
[Based on: A.P. article (Treasury chief says debt lid is tightening / He calls on Congress to quickly raise the ceiling beyond $9 trillion.) by Martin Crutsinger, p C2, S.L.P.D., 09/21/07]
2007 - U.S. Savings Rate / Worst Since the Great Depression - February 2nd, 2007: "People are saving at the lowest level since the Great Depression, and that could be a problem for the millions of baby boomers getting ready to retire. [NP] In fact, the Commerce Department reported Thursday [02/01/07] that the nation's personal savings rate for all of 2006 was a negative 1 percent, the worst showing in 73 years. [....] The 1 percent negative savings rate in 2006 came after a 0.4 percent negative rate in 2005. There have been only four years in history that the savings rate has fallen into negative territory. The other two were 1932 and 1933 during the Great Depression, when as many as one in four people were out of work, households were exhausting savings in order to pay the rent and buy food. [....]" [Based on: A.P. article (U.S. savings rate skids to worst showing in 73 years) by Martin Crutsinger, pp. B1 & B3, S.L.P.D., 02/02/07] - [Note: (my brackets text inserted) NP = New paragraph. - D.R.D.]
*Trivia: See article (U.S. Going Bankrupt?) @ http://mirrorh.com/timeline0706.html [entry date - 07/14/06]
2007 - War Costs / U.S.A. - October 25th, 2007: "[....] With the federal government $9.1 trillion in debt, much of the financial cost of the wars is being financed through borrowing that the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] estimates will cost up to $705 billion in interest payments by the year 2017. The projection works out to about $8,000 per American. [NP] In essence, said Levin [Carl Levin, D-Mich.], the war isn't being funded as it's being fought, but will instead be paid for by future taxpayers. [NP] 'My kids, your kids, our grandkids, our great-grandkids,' Levin told a group of reporters. 'I think there's a lot of reasons this war was a mistake, but one of them has been that we haven't paid for it. [....] American taxpayers have already spent $415 billion on interest for the portion of the war costs the government has had to borrow, the budget office estimated. [NP] Between now and 2017, interest costs to finance the wars will amount to between $175 billion and $290 billion, the CBO estimated, depending on the U.S. troop levels maintained in Iraq and Afghanistan." [Based on: Cox News Service article (Future generations facing huge tab for Iraq, Afghan wars / Interest costs could equal $8,000 for each American by 2017, U.S. says.), p A4, S.L.P.D., 10/25/07]
2011 - U.S. Government Looting Social Security To Wage Wars - April 9th, 2011:
“As long as the $1.2-trillion annual budget for the military-security complex is off limits (to cutting), nothing can be done about the US budget deficit except to renege on obligations to the elderly, confiscate private assets or print enough money to inflate away all debts,” Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Treasury Secretary under President Reagan warns.
In an article titled “Stealing from Social Security to Pay for Wars and Bailouts,” published in the April issue of the “Rock Creek Free Press” of Washington, D.C., Roberts says that Republicans are calling Social Security and Medicare “entitlements”—making them sound like welfare—when, in fact, workers over their lifetimes have contributed 15 percent of all their earnings to the payroll tax that funds these benefits and have every right to them.
And far from Social Security being in the red, between 1984 and 2009, Roberts writes, “the American people contributed $2-trillion…more to Social Security and Medicare in payroll taxes than was paid out in benefits” but “the government stole” that sum to fund wars and pork-barrel projects!
What’s more, under one realistic estimate, far from crashing into the red, “Social Security(OASDI) will have produced surplus revenues of $31.6-trillion by 2085, Roberts says.
Americans, apparently, are unaware of how the federal government’s illegal, foreign wars sap the economy and rob every household. The Iraq war cost alone is 20 percent of the size of last year’s entire U.S. economy. Instead of investing that sum at home, “which would have produced income and jobs growth and solvency for state and local governments, the US government wasted the equivalent of 20% of the economy in 2010 in blowing up infrastructure and people in foreign lands,” Roberts says.
“The US government spent a huge sum of money committing war crimes, while millions of Americans were thrown out of their jobs and foreclosed out of their homes,” he added. Viewed another way, the Pentagon continues to expand and put people to work to modernize its 700-800 bases abroad in order to dominate every corner of the globe while public works and public employment in America are going into the toilet.
“When short-term and long-term discouraged workers are added …the US has an unemployment rate of 22%,” Robert says. A country with that large a percentage out of work “has a shrunken tax base and feeble consumer purchasing power.”
The U.S. media, he claims, is only reporting one-third of the real cost of the wars, leaving out the sums needed for “lifelong care for the wounded and maimed, the cost of lifelong military pensions of those who fought in the wars, the replacement costs of the destroyed equipment, the opportunity cost of the resources wasted in war, and other costs.”
President Obama’s budget, if passed, doesn’t reduce the deficit over the next 10 years by enough to cover the projected deficit in the fiscal year 2012 budget alone, the financial authority writes. “Indeed, the deficits are likely to be substantially larger than forecast,” as the military-industrial complex “is more powerful than ever and shows no inclination to halt the wars for US hegemony,” Roberts says.
(Sherwood Ross heads a public relations firm “for good causes” and also runs the Anti-War News Service. Reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Based on: Inteldaily article (U.S. Government Looting Social Security To Wage Wars), by Sherwood Ross, 04/09/11]
2011 - War on Terror cost: $4.12 trillion, 225,000 dead - July 4th, 2011: "Nearly 10 years after the declaration of the War on Terror, the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan have killed at least 225,000 people, including men and women in uniform, contractors, and civilians. [NP] The wars will cost Americans between $3.2 and $4 trillion, including medical care and disability for current and future war veterans, according to a new report by the Eisenhower Research Project based at Brown University's Watson Institute for International Studies. [NP] If the wars continue, they are on track to require at least another $450 billion in Pentagon spending by 2020 [....]. [Based on: rediff NEWS article (War on Terror cost: $4.12 trillion, 225,000 dead, July 4th, 2011]
2013 - Richest 1 percent earn biggest share since 1920s / U.S.A. - September 11th, 2013: "[...] The very wealthiest Americans earned more than 19 percent of the country's household income last year  - their biggest share since 1928, the year before the stock market crash. And the top 10 percent captured a record 48.2 percent of the total earnings last year . [....]" [Based on: A.P. article (Richest 1 percent earn biggest share since 1920s) by Paul Wiseman, p. A10, S.L.P.D., 09/11/13]
2014 - There Are 85 People Who Are As Wealthy As Half The WORLD, Oxfam Reports - January 21st, 2014: "There Are 85 People Who Are As Wealthy As Half The WORLD, Oxfam Reports"
[Based on: Title for huffingtonpost.com article, 01/21/14]
*Trivia: "[...] A 2011 study by the CBO found that the top earning 1 percent of households increased their income by about 275% after federal taxes and income transfers over a period between 1979 and 2007, compared to a gain of just under 40% for the 60 percent in the middle of America's income distribution. Other sources find that the trend has continued since then. In spite of this data, only 42% of Americans think inequality has increased in the past ten years. In 2012, the gap between the richest 1 percent and the remaining 99 percent was the widest it's been since the 1920s. Incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20 percent, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1 percent in comparison. [... .]" [Based on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States]
"To this day , there has been no independent official inquiry into the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Kean Commission, with which most Americans are familiar, was based on the Bush/PNAC version of events. It was charged with probing the breakdown of intelligence prior to the attacks and making suggestions for improving communications among the competing agencies involved. The Commission, formed after more than a year of opposition by the Bush administration, did not…repeat...did NOT…investigate or report about the causes of the attacks. [....]"
[Based on: Article (Where the Hell Is YOUR Proof?) by Jesse, Editor - TvNewsLIES.org - October 2005]
*More Links: http://www.st911.org/
*Commentary: "Congress authorizes [September (14th?) 2001] use of force for war on terrorism." [D.R.D.]
Lords of War?
"WHILE PRIVATE GUNRUNNERS CONTINUE TO THRIVE, THE WORLD'S BIGGEST ARMS SUPPLIERS ARE THE U.S., U.K., RUSSIA, FRANCE AND CHINA. - THEY ARE ALSO THE FIVE PERMANENT MEMBERS OF THE U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL." [Based on: Widescreen Movie [DVD]: Lord of War , starring Nicolas Cage, etc.]
*Trivia: "No other Country spends the kind of money we [U.S.A.] spend on our military. Last year  Japan spent $42 billion. Italy spent $28 billion, Russia spent only $19 billion. The United States spent $455 billion." [Andy Rooney]
[Based on: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10504.htm]
*Trivia: "Just how much money will the United States spend on defense in the coming year, really? [NP] The official number, contained in the Defense Department budget request President George W. Bush sent Congress on Monday [02/05/07], is $481.4 billion, an 11 percent increase over the current year. [NP] But that doesn't count the supplemental $141.7 billion that the president requested to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2008. Nor does it count the additional $93.4 billion the president has requested for the 'global war on terror' in 2007. Nor does it count the $17.3 billion in nuclear weapons activities, which are part of the Energy Department budget, or the nearly $5.2 billion for defense-related work by other agencies, mainly the FBI. [....] You total everything up, as military analyst Fred Kaplan has at Slate.com, and a fair number for all the new money requested for national defense in 2008 is $739 billion. In constant dollars, that's more than any year since 1952 when the Korean War was raging and the nuclear arms race with the Soviet Union was accelerating. It amounts to 5.47 percent of the gross domestic product, the highest percentage of GDP since the 6 percent spent in 1986 at the height of the Reagan-era arms build-up. [NP] Not all of the money will make it through the congressional budget process, nor should it. [....] There is nothing that would trim defense spending like eliminating the $8 billion-a-month being spent on the war in Iraq. Mr. Bush's budget contemplates continued high-level operations there through 2008, and, indeed, into 2009. [....] " [Based on: Opinion Page article (Guns: $739 billion), p. B8, S.L.P.D., 02/07/07] - [NP = New paragraph. My brackets - D.R.D.]
*Trivia: "The US has spent $610 billion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and on protecting its bases worldwide since the Sep 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, a report released by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) said. [NP] The Bush administration spends on an average $12 billion a month on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the report by the CRS, an independent research agency that provides research and analysis to lawmakers. [NP] Ten of the 12 billion dollars was spent for Iraq and nearly two billion for Afghanistan, plus other minor costs. So far Iraq has accounted for $450 billion, and in fiscal year 2007 alone, about $165.8 billion have been spent on Iraq, a rise of 40 percent from last year. [NP] If the administration's war funding requests for fiscal 2008 were granted in full, the total war spending would rise to $758 billion, with $567 billion spent on Iraq, according to the report. [NP] The report forecast a total spending of $1.4 trillion on the war on terrorism by 2017."
[Based on: indianews.com article (US has spent over $600 billion on wars since 9/11) by By Xinhua. Washington, United States, 10:30 AM IST @
[My brackets text (NP = New Paragraph) - D.R.D.]
2011 - Meet the 0.01 Percent: War Profiteers - October 27th, 2011: "There's the top 1% of wealthy Americans (bankers, oil tycoons, hedge fund managers) and there's the top 0.01% of wealthy Americans: the military contractor CEOs. [....]" [Based on: Article (Meet the 0.01 Percent: War Profiteers) by Robert Greenwald, 10/27/11]
2017 - Privatizing war - August 7th, 2017: "Privatizing war / As bad as the Afghan situation is, letting contractors take over is worse." [Based on: Title for OPINION page article, p. A14, S.L.P.D., 08/07/17]
Who Has The Bomb?
"Estimated number of nuclear warheads as of 2004: Russia - 16,000 [down from 32,000]; U.S.A - 10,350 [down from 45,000]; China - 400; France - 350; United Kingdom - 200; Israel - 200; Pakistan - 24-48; India - 30-35; North Korea - 6-8? The last four countries on this list [Israel, Pakistan, India & North Korea] are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty." [Information based on: N.G.M., August 2005, pp. 104-105]
*Trivia: "Egypt's foreign minister on Saturday [08/27/05] turned down a request from the world's nuclear watchdog to sign a treaty banning the testing of nuclear weapons, saying Israel should first join a separate agreement calling for a halt to the spread of atomic bombs. The refusal by Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty has also made the Middle East more insecure, Ahmed Aboul Gheit was quoted by Egypt's semiofficial Middle East News Agency as saying. Aboul Gheit's comments came in a letter to Tibor Toth, the new executive secretary of the commission that oversees the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty." [Based on: News Services article, p. A13, S.L.P.D., 08/28/05]
*Trivia: "Nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu was arrested by Israeli police Friday [11/18/05] after visiting the West Bank, authorities said. The former technician at Israel's main nuclear reactor last year completed an 18-year prison sentence for revealing Israel's nuclear capability to a British newspaper in 1986. Based on Vanunu's evidence, including photos, experts said at the time Israel had the world's sixth largest stockpile of nuclear weapons. Israel neither acknowledges nor denies having a nuclear weapons' program, following a policy of nuclear ambiguity. [....]" [Based on: News Services article (Israeli police arrest nuclear whistleblower), p. A32, S.L.P.D., 11/19/05]
*Trivia: "The head of the U.N. atomic watchdog  is asking for international input on how to persudae Israel to join the Nonproliferation Treaty, in a move that is sure to add to pressure on the Jewish state to disclose its unacknowledged nuclear arsenal." [Based on: News Services article (Pressure on Israel), p. A12, S.L.P.D., 05/06/10]
2005 - Really Nuke Free - December 30th, 2005:
The dream of freeing the Middle East, in its entirety, of all weapons of mass destruction should not lose its holistic character. Attempts or proposals forwarded by Western and regional powers - or regional parties on behalf of international players - to divide the issue up into separate parts are certain to harm the collective interest of the region in attaining comprehensive security and stability.
During the past few years, Israel has insisted that its nuclear capacity - which remains subject to a policy of ambiguity, even before the world's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency - should only be dealt with in the context of a comprehensive settlement concerning its disputed occupation of Arab territories. Unfortunately, this disingenuous call has received significant international support, especially that Israel is not a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which all other Middle Eastern states - Iran included - are party.
Moreover, this stipulation was received with little Arab opposition - with the exception of Arab states bordering Israel. Further dividing the collective security issue, Arab countries in North Africa and the Gulf have pursued separate security arrangements, with some involving heavy U.S. participation in the Gulf.
Thus, it was disturbing to hear official statements coming out of the Gulf Cooperation Council summit this week putting clear emphasis on the issue of Iran's nuclear energy aspirations and a less than plain emphasis on Israeli nuclear weapons....
The language ultimately adopted in the final communique of the GCC summit on the need to free the entire Middle East is the right line to pursue but must be pursued comprehensively....
[Based on: Other Views page article (Really Nuke Free) by Al-Ahram, Cairo, p. C13, S.L.P.D., 12/30/05]
*Trivia: "Nuclear testing tally - Countries known [Israel is not known?] to have publicly conducted nuclear tests since 1945 - and status with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty: U.S. - First test: 1945; Last test: 1992; Treaty signed: Yes; Ratified: No; Number of nuclear tests: 1,030. Russia - First test: 1949; Last test: 1990; Treaty signed: Yes; Ratified: Yes; Number of nuclear tests: 715. France - First test: 1960; Last test: 1996; Treaty signed: Yes; Ratified: Yes; Number of nuclear tests: 210. U.K. - First test: 1952; Last test: 1991; Treaty signed: Yes; Ratified: Yes; Number of nuclear tests: 45. China - First test: 1964; Last test: 1996; Treaty signed: Yes; Ratified: No; Number of nuclear tests: 45. India - First test: 1974; Last test: 1998; Treaty signed: No; Ratified: No; Number of nuclear tests: 3. Pakistan - First test: 1998; Last test: 1998; Treaty signed: No; Ratified: No; Number of nuclear tests: 2. N. Korea - First test: 2006; Last test: 2006; Treaty signed: No; Ratified: No; Number of nuclear tests: 1. [....]" [Based on: Article (Joining the nuclear club), p. A5, S.L.P.D., 10/10/06] - [Source: Arms Control Association (U.S.) / MCT]
2007 - Trivia / Nuclear Risk Grows? - June 12th, 2007: "The world's top military powers are gradually dismantling their stockpiles of nuclear arms, but all are developing new missles and warheads with smaller yields that could increase the risk of atomic warfare, a Swedish research institute [Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)] said Monday [06/11/07]. The U.S., Russia, China, France, Britain, Pakistan and India are known to have nuclear weapons, while Israel is thought by most experts to have them. [NP] The report estimated those nations had 11,530 warheads available for delivery by missle or aircraft at the start of this year, with Russia and the United States accounting for more than 90 percent - 5,614 in Russia and 5,045 in the U.S. [....] India, Pakistan and Israel each have dozens of warheads, but their stockpiles are believed to be only partly deployed, the institute [SIPRI] said. [NP] 'India and Pakistan are both thought to be expanding their nuclear strike capabilities, while Israel seems to be waiting to see how the situatiuon in Iran develops,' it said. [....] International arms sales have grown since 2002, with China and India being the biggest importers and the U.S. and Russia the two major exporters, the report said. [NP] Five Middle Eastern countries were among the top 10 importers of weapons." [Based on: A.P. article (Nuclear risk grows with smaller atomic bombs, group says) by Karl Ritter, p. A7, S.L.P.D., 06/12/07] - [My brackets (NP = New Paragraph) - D.R.D.]
*Trivia: "ARMS SPENDING - The U.S., Russia, France, Britain and China held more than 26,000 nuclear warheads at the start of 2007. More than 11,000 are operational. / share of world arms expenditures United States 46%; Britain, France 5%; China, Japan 4%; Russia, Germany, Italy, Saudia Arabia 3%; India 2%. Number of deployed nuclear warheads as of January 2007 (Top five countries) Russia 5,614; United States 5,045; France 348; Britain 160; China 145 [Total: 11,312]." [Based on: Illustrated Graph - SOURCE: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) / AP - for A.P. article (Nuclear risk grows with smaller atomic bombs, group says) by Karl Ritter, p. A7, S.L.P.D., 06/12/07] - [My brackets - D.R.D.]
2010 - Britain shares arsenal data - May 27th, 2010: "Britain offered its first public accounting of its nuclear arsenal, disclosing that it has a stockpile of 225 warheads in a move that offers transparency to non-nuclear states in hope of winning stricter global controls on the spread of atomic weapons." [Based on: News Services article (Britain shares arsenal data)), p. A5, S.L.P.D., 05/27/10]
2010 - Military Spending - June 2nd, 2010: "Despite the global financial crisis, world military spending almost doubled in the past decade to reach $1.53 trillion in 2009, a Swedish think-tank said today. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said the United States remains the biggest spender, accounting for some 54 percent of the increase, the report said. China, which became the second-biggest military spender in 2008, retained that position last year. France was third." [Based on: News Services article (Military spending doubles), p. A14, 06/02/10]
2010 - U.S. reportedly has 324 metric tons of bomb-grade uranium - September 14th, 2010: "The Energy Department is holding 324 metric tons of bomb-grade uranium at the same time that the Obama administration is urging foreign nations to reduce or eliminate their stores of the material, according to a report to be released today by the nuclear watchdog group Project on Government Oversight." [Based on: News Services article (U.S. reportedly has 324 metric tons of bomb-grade uranium), p. A5, S.L.P.D., 09/14/10]
2005 - Trivia / Directed-Energy Weapons, U.S.A. - December 30th, 2005: "[....] Hyslop [Boeing's airborne laser program manager, Greg Hyslop] said preserving the airborne laser program is vital to developing future directed-energy weapons. 'The real power of having a speed-of-light weapon is that you can't see it and you can't hear it - and it's there at the speed of light,' Hyslop said. 'If the airborne laser is successful, it will open up a lot of other missions for directed energy that we probably have just started to scratch the surface. This really is the next major leap in warfare.' " [Based on: St. Louis Post-Dispatch article (Boeing test-fires anti-ballistic-missle laser) by Tim McLaughlin, p. B1, S.L.P.D., 12/30/05] - [Paragraph indents not transcribed - E.M.]
2010 - Nuclear Waste / U.S.A. - July 12th, 2010: "The amount of plutonium buried at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state is nearly three times what the federal government previously reported, a new analysis indicates, suggesting that a cleanup to protect future generations will be far more challenging than planners had assumed. [NP] Plutonium waste is much more prevalent around nuclear weapons sites nationwide than the Energy Department's official accounting indicates, said Robert Alvarez, a former department official who in recent months reanalyzed studies conducted by the department in the last 15 years for Hanford; the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory; the Savannah River Site, near Aiken, S.C.; and elsewhere." [Based on: News Services article (Nuclear waste numbers disputed), p. A4, S.L.P.D., 07/12/10]
2016 - U.N. panel backs global nuclear disarment - August 20th, 2016: "[...] Nuclear-armed powers including Russia, China and the United States have rejected the process. Japan abstained from the vote." [Based on: DIGEST article(U.N. panel backs global nuclear disarmament), p. a11, S.L.P.D., 08/20/16]
2016 - Total world debt tops $150 trillion, IMF says - October 6th, 2016: "Total world debt tops $150 trillion, IMF says" [Based on: Title for BUSINESS DIGEST article, p. A13, S.L.P.D., 10/06/16]
Misunderstood Words of the Day:
QUOTE - "+mark with numbers or (marginal) references XIV; cite or refer to; +note XVI; repeat (a passage) from a book, etc. XVII. - medL. quotare number, f. quot how many, or quota QUOTA. So quotation +numbering XV; +marginal reference XVI; (typogr.) large quadrat used for filling up blanks (orig. between marginal references); quoting passage quoted XVII; price of stocks, etc. XIX medl. quotatio, -on-." (Based on: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology)
CENSOR - "supervisor of morals, etc. XVI. - L. censor, f. censere pronounce as an opinion, assess, judge. Hence censor vb. XIX So censure +judgement XIV; adverse judgement XVII. - (O)F. - L. censura; see - URE. censure vb. XVI. - F. censurer." (Based on: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology)
WITNESS - "+knowledge, wisdom; attestation of a fact, etc., testimony. OE (ge)witness (ME. iwitnesse), f. WIT + -NESS; cf. OHG. giwiznessi, MDu. wetenisse, ON vitni, vitnis-. Hence witness vb. bear witness to XIII; be a witness of XVI." (Based on: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology)
PURPORT - "tenor or substance of a document, etc. XV. AN., OF. pur-, porport produce, contents, f. purporter :- medL. proportare, f. L. pro PRO + portare carry, bear. so purport vb. state, mean. XVI. - OF. purporter ." (Based on: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology)
Equation of the Day:
1 - 1 = 1 + 0
Page last updated 08/07/17