-->[img][/img]


Nun wissen wir das da ein wenig statistisch nachgeholfen wurde.

Hat jemand einen Text/Bericht/Artikel/Link oder was auch immer, wo dieses Bildchen wiederlegt wird?

Danke!!!!!!!

MARSCH

-->>[img][/img]
>
>Nun wissen wir das da ein wenig statistisch nachgeholfen wurde.
>Hat jemand einen Text/Bericht/Artikel/Link oder was auch immer, wo dieses Bildchen wiederlegt wird?
>Danke!!!!!!!
>MARSCH

Die steigende Staatsverschuldung auch 1998 - 2001 sagt doch alles. Wieso denn, wenn es"Überschüsse" gibt?

-->leuchtet ja auch irgendwie ein:-). Aber damit gibt sich mein Kumpel den ich gerade versuch zu überzeugen nicht zufrieden. Wenn irgend möglich bräuchte ich was konkreteres.

-->>leuchtet ja auch irgendwie ein:-). Aber damit gibt sich mein Kumpel den ich gerade versuch zu überzeugen nicht zufrieden. Wenn irgend möglich bräuchte ich was konkreteres.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm
Mal sehen, ob ich noch mehr finde...

--><table><table border="0" width="600"><tr><td><font face="Arial"><font size=5> </font></font><div align="Justify">



Mehr ist nicht nötig, nochmal danke!!

_______________

[img][/img]


"Not only is the truth out there, it is all around us. The specific bit of truth referred to in the headline comes from a splendid bit of detective work by Mr John Crudele of the New York Post. Mr Crudele has found, in the"Financial Report of the United States Government" for 2001, a signed cover letter from Treasury Secretary John O'Neill which states that the U.S. government did not really have the $US 127 Billion surplus they reported in 2001. No, on an accrual basis, they actually had a deficit of - are you sitting comfortably? - $US 515 Billion. We go into this piece of truth in MUCH more detail in the latest issue of The Privateer."
http://www.the-privateer.com/gold/week104.html

Beziehen tut sich der Artikel darauf:

"Accrual based financial reporting is critical to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the
U.S. Government’s operations. For fiscal year 2001, our results were an accrual-based deficit of
$515 billion in contrast to a $127 billion budget surplus reported last fall."
Versteckelt auf Seite 5 des"Financial Report of the United States Government for 2001" (http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/01frusg/01frusg.pdf) mit Unterschrift von Paul O'Neill (damaliger US-Finanzminister).


"Fiscal Year 2001 ended with the highest dollar debt in U.S. history, despite more false claims of a 'surplus'"

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/deficit-trusts.htm


"....The Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress issues factual public reports on the social security situation. The CRS says bluntly: There is no social security trust fund with real money or assets in it. Most people, and most of the media, don’t realize that social security taxes taken from people’s paychecks are not paid into a social security bank account. They are paid directly into the federal government’s general account. The politicians in Washington have stolen and spent over a trillion dollars of excess social security taxes that were not paid out in benefits to retirees.

For instance, in this year 2000 the government will take in social security taxes of 479 billion dollars—taken directly from the paychecks of 95% of the working public. Benefits paid out to retirees will be 409 billion dollars. The Treasury Department will give the Social Security Administration paper IOUs for the 70 billion of excess social security taxes that were supposed to be saved for future retirement benefits. Worse yet, the Treasury will not subtract this 70 billion debt from the “federal income surplus” that is claimed. Because your social security money was stolen, there was no real federal surplus the last two years....."

http://www.pushback.com/Wattenburg/articles/socialsecurity.html


</div></td></tr></table>

-->><table><table border="0" width="600"><tr><td><font face="Arial"><font size=5> </font></font><div align="Justify">
>Mehr ist nicht nötig, nochmal danke!!
>_______________
>[img][/img]
>
>"Not only is the truth out there, it is all around us. The specific bit of truth referred to in the headline comes from a splendid bit of detective work by Mr John Crudele of the New York Post. Mr Crudele has found, in the"Financial Report of the United States Government" for 2001, a signed cover letter from Treasury Secretary John O'Neill which states that the U.S. government did not really have the $US 127 Billion surplus they reported in 2001. No, on an accrual basis, they actually had a deficit of - are you sitting comfortably? - $US 515 Billion. We go into this piece of truth in MUCH more detail in the latest issue of The Privateer."
>http://www.the-privateer.com/gold/week104.html
>Beziehen tut sich der Artikel darauf:
>"Accrual based financial reporting is critical to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the
>U.S. Government’s operations. For fiscal year 2001, our results were an accrual-based deficit of
>$515 billion in contrast to a $127 billion budget surplus reported last fall."
>Versteckelt auf Seite 5 des"Financial Report of the United States Government for 2001" (http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/01frusg/01frusg.pdf) mit Unterschrift von Paul O'Neill (damaliger US-Finanzminister).
>
>"Fiscal Year 2001 ended with the highest dollar debt in U.S. history, despite more false claims of a 'surplus'"
>http://mwhodges.home.att.net/deficit-trusts.htm
>
>"....The Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress issues factual public reports on the social security situation. The CRS says bluntly: There is no social security trust fund with real money or assets in it. Most people, and most of the media, don’t realize that social security taxes taken from people’s paychecks are not paid into a social security bank account. They are paid directly into the federal government’s general account. The politicians in Washington have stolen and spent over a trillion dollars of excess social security taxes that were not paid out in benefits to retirees.
>For instance, in this year 2000 the government will take in social security taxes of 479 billion dollars—taken directly from the paychecks of 95% of the working public. Benefits paid out to retirees will be 409 billion dollars. The Treasury Department will give the Social Security Administration paper IOUs for the 70 billion of excess social security taxes that were supposed to be saved for future retirement benefits. Worse yet, the Treasury will not subtract this 70 billion debt from the “federal income surplus” that is claimed. Because your social security money was stolen, there was no real federal surplus the last two years....."
>http://www.pushback.com/Wattenburg/articles/socialsecurity.html
>
></div></td></tr></table>

-->Jetzt fällt uns langsam der Schleier vor den Augen der Welt-Oeffentlichkeit:
O'Neill der"naive" und ehrliche Finanz-Minister war von der Adminstration
Bush gar nicht mehr tolerier-noch haltbar.

Er musste gekippt werden, weil der ja Bilanzen lesen konnte.


Emerald.

-->Iss schon

<iframe src="http://www.miprox.de/Wirtschaft_allgemein/US-Haushaltsueberschuesse.html" width=90% height=800 hspace=30 vspace=50 scrolling=yes></iframe>