|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
We need that clip from the aliens movie, "Put Them in Charge !".
Give 'em a week and see what they could do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
So I'll answer based on the first.. yes I believe in democracy, wish we still had one that worked.
That's my point. Democracy is dying, and when it dies in the country that gave it its best demonstration, democracy is finished. It might still pop up around the world in various forms, but the argument that it is the best form of governance will have been refuted. Your explanation for why the people can't be blamed is convincing, but your response only seems to further support the point that democracy is doomed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
Quote:
... and yet every person posting here would call himself a democrat. Ironic, no?
No. I would call myself a republican, not a democrat. I would never call myself a democrat, neither lowercase or uppercase.
Democrat (small "d"), republican ... same thing as far as I'm concerned. Do you believe the power of governance should be held by the common people? If so, you fit into this category. And yet you disparage the common people more than anyone in this thread. Or, do I have you wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Democrat (small "d"), republican ... same thing as far as I'm concerned. Do you believe the power of governance should be held by the common people?
Governance? No. However, the freedom should reside with the individual.
Quote:
If so, you fit into this category. And yet you disparage the common people more than anyone in this thread. Or, do I have you wrong?
You have me totally wrong. I don't fit into your category and I don't disparage anyone. As I've stated, the freedom should reside in the individual. Individual liberties should not be trumped by majority vote of the people... ever!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
I don't disparage anyone.
Oh really? So you were being facetious when you wrote the following? -
Quote:
I would add that most Americans lack the intellect of a snail when it comes to most aspects of life.
Quote:
I would bet that most Americans would ask who's causing the 'grease' shortage and I'd further bet that most of them don't even know that cypress is a type of tree. They'd probably suspect that you're trying to pull a fast one on them.
Nope, you don't disparage anyone. 
But, on this more important point -
Quote:
Governance? No. However, the freedom should reside with the individual.
- I stand corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Veterans marched on the WWII Memorial today and are moving the barricades blocking access at the Memorial to the White House " where they belong" - said one of the vets. God bless the vets. 
Last edited by Dave; 10/13/13 12:25 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Democracy is dying, and when it dies in the country that gave it its best demonstration, democracy is finished.
Democracy is and always will be the best form of government.. problem is that it requires a few things.. an involved and informed public being the most important, which we don't have.
the second being a "public servant" government, which we also don't have...
human greed with prevail over everything, every time... whether it's a dictatorship, socialism, a democracy, whatever.. eventually, individual human greed, from those at the top and/or those at the bottom, will create problems.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969 |
I'm not sure that a true Democracy would ever be desirable. In a Representative Republic, which our government is, the rights of the minority are protected more than they would be in a strict Democracy. In a strict Democracy, 50.1% absolutely beats 49.9% every time. In our Republic, imperfect as it is, no slightest majority can rule completely. The states maintain all powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution. Legislation must pass 2 houses of Congress, and then be signed by the Executive. It can, theoretically, be stopped at various steps along the way, and can be vetoed by the President. Even in the Senate, a mere majority is often not enough.
We also have a Supreme Court that is, by definition, designed to protect the rights of the minority. If the majority passes legislation that infringes on the rights of the minority, then the minority can appeal to the court system, up to the Supreme Court,
In a true Democracy, people vote, either themselves, or through representatives, but any margin over 50% is sufficient to carry the day.
People complain about how our form of government too often results in gridlock. To me, that's often desirable.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664 |
And then there is this from the Chinese http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/indepth/2013-10/13/c_132794246.htm Commentary: U.S. fiscal failure warrants a de-Americanized world English.news.cn 2013-10-13 09:57:25 By Xinhua writer Liu Chang BEIJING, Oct. 13 (Xinhua) -- As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled world to start considering building a de-Americanized world. Emerging from the bloodshed of the Second World War as the world's most powerful nation, the United States has since then been trying to build a global empire by imposing a postwar world order, fueling recovery in Europe, and encouraging regime-change in nations that it deems hardly Washington-friendly. With its seemingly unrivaled economic and military might, the United States has declared that it has vital national interests to protect in nearly every corner of the globe, and been habituated to meddling in the business of other countries and regions far away from its shores. Meanwhile, the U.S. government has gone to all lengths to appear before the world as the one that claims the moral high ground, yet covertly doing things that are as audacious as torturing prisoners of war, slaying civilians in drone attacks, and spying on world leaders. Under what is known as the Pax-Americana, we fail to see a world where the United States is helping to defuse violence and conflicts, reduce poor and displaced population, and bring about real, lasting peace. Moreover, instead of honoring its duties as a responsible leading power, a self-serving Washington has abused its superpower status and introduced even more chaos into the world by shifting financial risks overseas, instigating regional tensions amid territorial disputes, and fighting unwarranted wars under the cover of outright lies. As a result, the world is still crawling its way out of an economic disaster thanks to the voracious Wall Street elites, while bombings and killings have become virtually daily routines in Iraq years after Washington claimed it has liberated its people from tyrannical rule. Most recently, the cyclical stagnation in Washington for a viable bipartisan solution over a federal budget and an approval for raising debt ceiling has again left many nations' tremendous dollar assets in jeopardy and the international community highly agonized. Such alarming days when the destinies of others are in the hands of a hypocritical nation have to be terminated, and a new world order should be put in place, according to which all nations, big or small, poor or rich, can have their key interests respected and protected on an equal footing. To that end, several corner stones should be laid to underpin a de-Americanized world. For starters, all nations need to hew to the basic principles of the international law, including respect for sovereignty, and keeping hands off domestic affairs of others. Furthermore, the authority of the United Nations in handling global hotspot issues has to be recognized. That means no one has the right to wage any form of military action against others without a UN mandate. Apart from that, the world's financial system also has to embrace some substantial reforms. The developing and emerging market economies need to have more say in major international financial institutions including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, so that they could better reflect the transformations of the global economic and political landscape. What may also be included as a key part of an effective reform is the introduction of a new international reserve currency that is to be created to replace the dominant U.S. dollar, so that the international community could permanently stay away from the spillover of the intensifying domestic political turmoil in the United States. Of course, the purpose of promoting these changes is not to completely toss the United States aside, which is also impossible. Rather, it is to encourage Washington to play a much more constructive role in addressing global affairs. And among all options, it is suggested that the beltway politicians first begin with ending the pernicious impasse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
No offense intended, but why should we give a damn what the Chinese think?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
We shouldn't, per se.... but, we should concern ourselves with what others think about what the Chinese think.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561 |
Just clicking
I thought I heard this morning on the Today program that there is a chance that a deal is at hand to end the shutdown and increase the debt ceiling until sometime in January or February. I was sleepy and busy with payroll so I"m not sure of the details.
Did I just dream that, or did it actually happen?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664 |
Seems to be close to a deal in the Senate that would get us until after the new year and then we could do this again.
The House has already this morning crafted their own deal and sent it to the Senate and it was shot down.
There may be a deal coming in the Senate but the House still has to bring it for a vote and pass the short term fix. Some are thinking that will not happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664 |
House Republicans struggle to find consensus on a plan to raise the debt ceiling
By Chris Moody, Yahoo News30 minutes ago
View gallery
Speaker of the House John Boehner(L) speaks after a House GOP meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, October 15, 2013 (AFP Photo/Jim Watson)
.
House Republicans met privately for more than an hour in the basement of the Capitol on Tuesday, but finished with no clear proposal for how to avoid a possible federal default.
“There have been no decisions about what exactly we will do,” Republican House Speaker John Boehner said after the meeting. “But we’re going to continue to work with members on both sides of the aisle to try and make sure that there’s no issue of default and that we get our government reopened.”
Translation: Republican leaders still can’t find the votes they need to pass a debt ceiling increase.
The federal government has been shut down since Oct. 1, and the Treasury Department says that Congress must agree to a plan to raise the federal debt ceiling by the end of the day Thursday so the government can continue to pay its bills on time. Failing to raise the borrowing limit could rattle financial markets and put the federal government at risk of defaulting on its debts.
While nothing conclusive came out of the closed-door House GOP meeting, which began with a group rendition of “Amazing Grace,” lawmakers who attended described a possible framework for a House proposal that could see a vote as early as Tuesday afternoon: In exchange for an agreement to raise the federal debt ceiling until February and reopen the government until January, House Republicans want a law that would force all members of Congress and top administration officials — including President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden — to enroll in the federal exchanges established by the Democrats’ federal health care law. They also are considering asking for a two-year delay of the tax on medical devices that also is in the health care overhaul.
Based on reactions from House GOP members leaving the meeting, there appeared to be no consensus of support for the plan. Conservative lawmakers who for months have insisted that the health care law be repealed or delayed as part of any deal would obviously have to make concessions to their demands, and therefore reject a noisy base that is urging them not to cave.
Many refused to discuss their thoughts on the meeting with the media, and others were not enthusiastic.
“I don’t like it,” California Republican Rep. John Campbell said when asked about the proposals. Campbell added that he would need more details before declaring how he would vote.
Democratic leaders in the Senate and White House officials quickly made clear that they would not accept the House proposals, even though nothing had been officially submitted for a bill.
"Let's be clear: The House legislation will not pass the Senate,” Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage dismissed the initiative as “a partisan attempt to appease a small group of tea party Republicans who forced the government shutdown in the first place.”
The potential House Republican proposals come after several days of intense and delicate negotiations between Senate Republicans and Democrats. Still, a Senate deal has not been announced, and Senate negotiators on Tuesday postponed a meeting, a sign that there is still work to be done between both sides.
Meanwhile, Obama is planning to meet with House Democratic leaders about the debt ceiling situation at 3:15 p.m. ET Tuesday.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Here's a thought.... suck it up and reduce the debt, then the ceiling won't matter.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,943
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,943 |
Quote:
Here's a thought.... suck it up and reduce the debt, then the ceiling won't matter.
Unfortunately, that only makes sense to the working people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-fallen-two-st/Quote:
Rep. Dennis Ross says U.S. spending has fallen two straight years for first time since Korean War
U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross, R-Lakeland, is one of a small group of Republicans calling for an end to the government shutdown.
After all, Republicans have succeeded in reining in government spending, Ross wrote in an op-ed in the Tampa Bay Times (the parent of PolitiFact), on Oct. 7, 2013.
"In the few years since I was elected to Congress in 2010, we have achieved huge savings and taken monumental steps. For the first time since the Korean War, total federal spending has gone down for two years in a row," Ross wrote, adding, "That is why I would support a continuing resolution that funds the government at sequestration levels for one year."
A reader asked us whether Ross was correct that, "for the first time since the Korean War, total federal spending has gone down for two years in a row." We thought the claim was interesting, and we decided to check it out.
By the most basic measure we found that Ross is right.
The Korean War was an active conflict through the signing of a truce on July 26, 1953, so we counted starting in 1953.
Between 1953 and 1955, federal spending fell each year, from $76.1 billion to $70.9 billion to $68.4 billion, according to the Office of Management and Budget. By 1956, spending had edged up again, to $70.6 billion.
After that, spending almost always went up every year, at least until recently. It fell for one year between 1964 and 1965, and then once again between 2009 and 2010.
But the only time it fell two years in a row was between 2011 and 2013. In 2011, federal outlays were $3.60 trillion. Outlays fell to $3.54 trillion in 2012, and the Congressional Budget Office projects the figure to fall to $3.46 trillion in 2013.
We should note that this is not the only way to measure a claim like this. Sometimes, raw dollars aren’t an especially useful measurement for analyzing long periods of history, especially when talking about things that are growing. Inflation, population growth and economic expansion almost inevitably make the most recent year the largest ever. However, in this case, we think that using raw dollars is an acceptable measurement. That’s because reductions in spending mean swimming against the tide of inflation and growth.
Our rating
Ross said that, "for the first time since the Korean War, total federal spending has gone down for two years in a row." Since the 1950s, spending fell one year between 1964 and 1965, and then once again between 2009 and 2010. But the only time it fell two years in a row was between 2011 and 2013. We rate the statement True.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
That's a Year-on-Year comparison... it just means that with the withdrawal from Iraq completed in Dec 2011 we are seeing a reduction in expenses. Just as we saw the two wars increase the spending. Congress hasn't "achieved" anything.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,943
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,943 |
To me, that just shows how rampant the spending from the federal gov't. has been. In 1953 they spent 76.1 billion, then cut 5.2 billion, then cut another 2.5 billion (1955) That's 7.7 billion in cuts. An 11 percent cut.
Fast forward 58 years later, we are spending 3.6 TRILLION. (They somehow managed to "cut" 60 billion )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Quote:
To me, that just shows how rampant the spending from the federal gov't. has been. In 1953 they spent 76.1 billion, then cut 5.2 billion, then cut another 2.5 billion (1955) That's 7.7 billion in cuts. An 11 percent cut.
Fast forward 58 years later, we are spending 3.6 TRILLION. (They somehow managed to "cut" 60 billion )
1953 was the last year we were in Korea. The following two years were transitional years.
We're simply seeing the same thing now following Iraq.
Of course, this government is trying to take us back to war in Syria (we've had nearly a thousand troops on the ground in Jordan since early summer) and all across Africa.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Oh, I agree - just think it's interesting. Also interesting that you don't see that trend at the end of Vietnam (or even one year of a spending freeze).
Either way - at 2 days away from the debt ceiling - "spend less" is a dumb argument - you contractually can't spend that much less in that short of a time.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561 |
Quote:
Here's a thought.... suck it up and reduce the debt, then the ceiling won't matter.
Nice thought,, exactly what I did when things got tight a few years ago. I cut costs, some of them didn't feel so good, but I cut them anyway. I found out, I could live without a lot of things I was paying for.
the trouble is, I think sucking it up and reducing debt for a government is tougher because there isn't one person makng the decision like there is in my home. (don't EVER tell my wife that, she still thinks she makes the final decision on many things LOL)
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Quote:
Either way - at 2 days away from the debt ceiling - "spend less" is a dumb argument - you contractually can't spend that much less in that short of a time.
Empirically, yes. At what point, however, do we get these dillholes to stop making contracts that spend beyond our limits??
I say that we let it all default. Time to critically re-evaluate just what it is we should be paying for on the federal level.
The federal government is not supposed to be The Great Caretaker... it is simply supposed to be what binds The States together.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
I never got the slashing of benefits first talk. It's obvious that we're spending way too much on the military and it needs to be reduced by 400 billion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Uh huh.... I mean - instead of getting in debt - we could just instantaneously make the world economy choke by defaulting.
And this "federal government holds the states together" bit went out of date in 1865. It's pretty clear that this model doesn't work in a globalized world (find another country which has strong state/local governments).
We can have reasonable arguments on spending - but "let us default" shows severe ignorance about how the world works.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,664 |
Fitch puts US AAA rating on rating watch negative
Text Size Published: Tuesday, 15 Oct 2013 | 4:46 PM ETBy: CNBC.com with Reuters
Play VideoFitch puts US credit rating on negative watch
Tuesday, 15 Oct 2013 | 4:46 PM ET Fitch has put the U.S. credit rating on negative watch, reports CNBC's Dominic Chu.Fitch Ratings put the US government's "AAA" credit rating on 'rating watch negative' Tuesday, saying that the standstill on the U.S. debt ceiling negotiations risks undermining the effectiveness of the country's government and political institutions.
U.S. stock index futures fell.
"Although Fitch continues to believe that the debt ceiling will be raised soon, the political brinkmanship and reduced financing flexibility could increase the risk of a U.S. default," the rating agency wrote in a statement.
S&P 500 futures fell 9.6 points while Dow Jones industrial average futures sank 60 points and Nasdaq 100 futures fell 7.5 points.
A Treasury Department spokesperson said the Fitch move reflected an urgent need for Congress to act on the debt ceiling.
Earlier today Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid lashed out at House Republicans, shortly after the collapse of a rival GOP proposal.
He warned at the time that the U.S. credit ratings could be downgraded as soon as Tuesday night.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Quote:
Uh huh.... I mean - instead of getting in debt - we could just instantaneously make the world economy choke by defaulting.
For the vindictive sociopath in me, It is such a VERY tempting thought.
Quote:
And this "federal government holds the states together" bit went out of date in 1865. It's pretty clear that this model doesn't work in a globalized world (find another country which has strong state/local governments).
I'm not so sure about that it is as out of date. Simply because we left it behind doesn't mean that it isn't a better way to be.
Quote:
but "let us default" shows severe ignorance about how the world works.
No, it's more just angry venting. I'm tired of these jackwads consistently upping the limit, then spending beyond it.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,840
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,840 |
I'm OK with the government doing that as long as I can as well for the next 20 or 30 years  If i can't get away with it then screw them
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
We shouldn't, per se.... but, we should concern ourselves with what others think about what the Chinese think.
Why should we care what anyone outside of America thinks?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Here's a thought.... suck it up and reduce the debt, then the ceiling won't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Quote:
Quote:
We shouldn't, per se.... but, we should concern ourselves with what others think about what the Chinese think.
Why should we care what anyone outside of America thinks?
Because the very value and validity of our dollar depends upon it.
If the world becomes "not America-centric", then the dollar will eventually not be the world standard and loses value.... and the horror stories of an economic collapse of epic proportions happens.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969 |
Who cares if the debt ceiling is raised? Seriously. We have enough money coming in from taxes each month to allow us to service our debt, and as long as we do that, the Debt Ceiling is moot. If the government is largely shut down, except for vital services and programs that self fund, (Social Security and Medicare) then we aren't accumulating additional debt.
As far as spending leveling off in the past 2 years .... it damn well should have., We have run without a budget for 5 years now. No one knows what we spend. No one controls it except in the most general of terms. We have gone from the debt being 68% of GDP in 2008, (Obama's 1st year in office) to 98% today. Part of that is the economic slowdown, but part is adding more and more and more spending on top of what already existed.
The federal government, mostly in the past 20 or so years. has also done a huge disservice to the middle class by cutting interest rates down to nothing, and making it impossible for the middle class to earn interest on savings, and forcing them into riskier investments instead. When a person loses 2% of their money's worth each year, and earns less than 1% interest, it makes saving money stupid and ineffective. There is no real safe, reliable way to save money for retirement. With most companies not offering pensions, this becomes a double whammy on the middle class. The government is happy because they can borrow with paying little or no interest on the debt ...... but people trying to save money for any reason (retirement, to buy a car, etc) are screwed. Further, greatly reduced interest rates had one other effect on something very important to most people. People have been able to afford a larger mortgage ...... and home prices have inflated over the years to match this ability. Same thing with car prices. When I got into the car business back in 1993, a Dodge Shadow, the entry level car for Dodge, started right around $8000. A base Cavalier also started out in that same $8000 range.
The 2013 Dodge Dart started at over $15,000. The minuscule Chevy Spark, which I don't even recall seeing on the streets anyway, starts over $12, 000. The Cruze is in the $16,000 range.
Entry level cars have doubled in price, and the upper level luxury SUVs, and such, have gone to the $50,000 and up range. Give people 0% loans, however, and more expensive becomes somewhat more affordable.
I don't know what the answer is at this point, It is unlikely that we will be able to make any appreciable dent in the national debt. If we don't, then the government will be forced to maintain interest rates as close to 0% as possible so that our debt doesn't explode even further. That has created a new status quo on large ticket item prices, and has destroyed the ability of the middle class to save money long term.
Bleh. I am so glad that I don't have children. I worry for what this entire political mess we have in place is going to do to the world we will leave them.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Because the very value and validity of our dollar depends upon it.
If the world becomes "not America-centric", then the dollar will eventually not be the world standard and loses value.... and the horror stories of an economic collapse of epic proportions happens.
That's overblown. If that was the case, the UK wouldn't exist. The truth is that we're losing our 'grip on control' because we're spending more than we make.
And how did the US do while our currency wasn't the standard?
That argument is total garbage.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,882 |
Quote:
I never got the slashing of benefits first talk. It's obvious that we're spending way too much on the military and it needs to be reduced by 400 billion.
I'll just say this: I know a lot about military spending. There is some waste in there for sure, but it's more based on Congress routing money to their districts/lobbyist defense contractors. That needs to be exposed as much as possible.
That being said, you have very little idea of what you're talking about.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Social Security is no more "self-Funding" than Bernie Maidoff's investment plan.
I remember the opinion expressed that it was "well and efficiently run", even after acknowledging the TWO TRILLION DOLLARS that was missing from the fund.
Cut $400 Billion from the military? ABSO-Freakin-Lutely!!! That only leaves the fairly minor sum of about $1,000 Billion more to cut, give or take a few hundred billion.
Easy, painless cuts in one or another area just aren't enough. We are far, far past that point. Too much stupid handling too much money for too long. What you want or what makes you feel good is no longer a feasible plan. There will be pain, suffering, and death. The problem is that there are the people that work for a living, and almost half the population that does not, but votes in large numbers. Our current system is not built to solve this problem, it is built to CREATE it.
If you live in a major city, get out. If you don't know how to grow vegetables, learn. If you do not own a weapon to defend yourself, get one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Between 1953 and 1955, federal spending fell each year, from $76.1 billion to $70.9 billion to $68.4 billion, according to the Office of Management and Budget. By 1956, spending had edged up again, to $70.6 billion.
That's what we spend in a week now.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,969 |
Social Security could be more self funding than it has been. Instead we have dumped the Social Security monies into the general fund and have written IOUs. Our government has let us down repeatedly.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
To be fair - simple inflation makes the $76.1B figure $667B today.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561 |
Quote:
Social Security could be more self funding than it has been. Instead we have dumped the Social Security monies into the general fund and have written IOUs. Our government has let us down repeatedly.
That's the way I understand it.
There isn't anything wrong with Social Security that making our elected officials keep their grimy little mitts off of it and to repay what they borrowed for whatever reason.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,423 |
Quote:
Quote:
Social Security could be more self funding than it has been. Instead we have dumped the Social Security monies into the general fund and have written IOUs. Our government has let us down repeatedly.
That's the way I understand it.
There isn't anything wrong with Social Security that making our elected officials keep their grimy little mitts off of it and to repay what they borrowed for whatever reason.
These loans are part of our National Debt, and these payments are part of our annual spending.
Unfortunately, we keep dipping back into things to borrow more.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... THE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN
|
|
