Common sense missing in deficit discussions?

I don't know how good you are at math, David, but it doesn't sound like that was your strong suit in school; maybe not history, either. You see, this country started off, in 1791, with $75.5 Million worth of debt. I got larger and larger ever since, except for one short interlude during Andrew Jackson's administration when it got down to just under $34,000. However, Jackson had to sell most of what the government owned (mostly lands) to do this, but it didn't take but a few years to jump back into the millions of dollars worth of debt.

You cannot make an analogy of personal debt to government debt; they just aren't the same thing and your oversimplified explanation of what happens next isn't even close to being true. If we cut government spending, we cut the GDP (size of the economy); this is almost always a bad thing (think early 2009; on steroids). It isn't good to run up the debt either. But, given the rotten choices of letting the economy go into Depression or amassing debt, many choose the debt. Others, for reasons unknown to me, choose the Depression (or deny that it could possibly happen despite the historical evidence and/or simple math of less GDP).

It is a complicated beast. Most of the talk is just that; disgusting rhetoric that doesn't solve anything (and usually makes matters worse). We are boxed into a situation where we have to choose the lessor of two evils. People are taking their sides.

The bottom line I think is that the government SHOULD be run as a business! Checks and balances! All I know is if I refinance my house and my payment is reduced by $300 a month, but then I trade my car in on a brand new car and my payments on my NEW car INCREASE by $300 a month...I'm sure as hell not so ignorant as to go around spending my "extra $300" savings a month that I save on my house payment because it doesn't really exist! Sounds pretty darn simple to me...David's figure is right. It's a wash in the end in my opinion as well. That's just common sense...which CLEARLY, isn't that common on The Hill.

Do we need the 2.4 trillion so the Fed can issue more money so banks can keep lending?

No.

The bottom line I think is that the government SHOULD be run as a business!

It is run like a business. The only difference between Ford and GM when it came to bailouts was that Ford had acquired a $25B line of credit prior to 2008. GM waited and there was no credit available and was forced into bankruptcy. All companies leverage to grow. Homeowners leverage their job, credit rating, etc.