hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 2, 2011 22:45:07 GMT -5
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Apr 2, 2011 22:50:42 GMT -5
Your crap link above doesn't work but your other link earlier showing the US at around 58% debt to GDP is bogus. Its more like 80% now and will hit the critical 100% within a year. You're finished.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 2, 2011 23:03:50 GMT -5
This message is deleted due to defamatory language Deminmaine- Moderator
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 2, 2011 23:16:11 GMT -5
France's debt is about 120%, etc, etc. Thanks Pubs for blowing the economy, the recovery, and now the state budgets and the unemployed. Please bring on 2012 and another Obama landslide...Tax the RICH!! (70% want to!) Palin/Beck 2012!! ;D
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Apr 2, 2011 23:21:35 GMT -5
This message is deleted due to defamatory content deminmaine- Moderator
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 2, 2011 23:43:54 GMT -5
This message is deleted due to defamatory language Deminmaine- Moderator
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Apr 2, 2011 23:51:06 GMT -5
You do know what debt to GDP ratio means...? And don't worry about the pubs. There will be plenty of shooting to go around for everybody!
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 2, 2011 23:56:18 GMT -5
Yup, and Japan's and many others are much worse than ours. We might be out of this by now without Pub fear mongering and pure politics and stupid Voodoo, AND this was all their fault...
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Apr 3, 2011 0:00:35 GMT -5
This message is deleted due to defamatory language deminmaine- Moderator
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 1:24:48 GMT -5
"Retard" means "stupid", which is what is banned. Not "ignorant" or "lazy", =dittohead, dittohead. --and Pub is the megarich greedy bastids, not dittohead sheep like you.
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 9:55:51 GMT -5
So because someone else hasa bigger debt, therefore our debt is ok?
WOW!
Can't argue with (il)logic like that!
The depths that the left dig just shocks me. Well, not really... they're lefties.
Thanks Pubs for blowing the economy, the recovery, and now the state budgets and the unemployed.
Huh?
Based on what? Where is your proof? Meanwhile Obama and the Democrats were in power for 2 years and achieved nothing as they completely ignored the economy to ram through an ill conceived and unconstitutional healthcare plan.
Hey, let's kill Obamacare! By your logic, places like Kenya (where Obama was born) has even WORSE healthcare so we should be happy with what we have now!
Please bring on 2012 and another Obama landslide...Tax the RICH!! (70% want to!)
The majority, at least in the last election, clearly rejected Obama, the Democrats, and Obamacare so why has Obama not stepped down and Congress repealed Obamacare? Majority rules, right?
BTW, what else do the majority want? I'd reckon a balanced budget, no Obamacare, and reduced spending. Where is Obama on that? Yeah, he's awol playing golf.
Taxing the rich is a horrible idea since they can move their money elsewhere. Just one example: the tax laws that would tax again the profits that American companies have made overseas (already taxed there) encourages American companies to invest that money outside of America. Result: less jobs for Americans. Wow, BRILLIANT!!!
Hey, if you want to tax the rich, let's start by breaking the Kennedy trust which that clan has used to evade the death taxes for decades!
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 9:58:16 GMT -5
If investors decide that we're a banana republic whose politicians can't or won't come to grips with long-term problems, they will indeed stop buying our debt. But that's not a prospect that hinges, one way or another, on whether we punish ourselves with short-run spending cuts.
Just ask the Irish, whose government -- having taken on an unsustainable debt burden by trying to bail out runaway banks -- tried to reassure markets by imposing savage austerity measures on ordinary citizens. The same people urging spending cuts on America cheered. ''Ireland offers an admirable lesson in fiscal responsibility,'' declared Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute, who said that the spending cuts had removed fears over Irish solvency and predicted rapid economic recovery.
That was in June 2009. Since then, the interest rate on Irish debt has doubled; Ireland's unemployment rate now stands at 13.5 percent.
And then there's the British experience. Like America, Britain is still perceived as solvent by financial markets, giving it room to pursue a strategy of jobs first, deficits later. But the government of Prime Minister David Cameron chose instead to move to immediate, unforced austerity, in the belief that private spending would more than make up for the government's pullback. As I like to put it, the Cameron plan was based on belief that the confidence fairy would make everything all right.
But she hasn't: British growth has stalled, and the government has marked up its deficit projections as a result.
Which brings me back to what passes for budget debate in Washington these days.
A serious fiscal plan for America would address the long-run drivers of spending, above all health care costs, and it would almost certainly include some kind of tax increase. But we're not serious: any talk of using Medicare funds effectively is met with shrieks of ''death panels,'' and the official G.O.P. position -- barely challenged by Democrats -- appears to be that nobody should ever pay higher taxes. Instead, all the talk is about short-run spending cuts.
In short, we have a political climate in which self-styled deficit hawks want to punish the unemployed even as they oppose any action that would address our long-run budget problems. And here's what we know from experience abroad: The confidence fairy won't save us from the consequences of our folly.
Sign In to E-Mail Print Connect with The New York Times on Facebook. Ads by Googlewhat's this? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
MOST E-MAILEDMOST VIEWEDRECOMMENDED FOR YOU
Go to Complete List » Show My Recommendations
Go to Complete List » Show My Recommendations
Log in to discover more articles based on what you‘ve read. Go to Your Recommendations » What’s This? | Don’t Show What’s This? | Don’t Show PRESENTED BY What’s This? | Don’t Show
Inside NYTimes.com Real Estate » T Magazine | Spring Design Issue Arts » Wounded in Crossfire of a Capital Culture War Magazine » On Libya’s Revolutionary Road U.S. » Op-Ed: Mother Nature’s Melting Pot Fashion & Style » Weddings and Celebrations Opinion » Al Aswany and Pericoli: The Unvanquished Theater » Need a Broad? Call Turner Travel » Why We Travel Opinion » Ben Schott: Pluviocabulary The variety of wet weather with which spring confronts us would test even an Eskimo’s power of description. Real Estate » A Home Wallpapered With Memories in Queens N.Y. / Region » Keys to a Castle
Home World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Autos Site Map © 2011 The New York Times Company Privacy Your Ad Choices Terms of Service Terms of Sale Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Work for Us Advertise
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 10:29:02 GMT -5
BTW, we know that taxing the rich will not work since we have seen over and over again that raising the income tax drops revenue, not increase it.
Beyond that though, as revenue increases so does spending. Even with high incomes taxes (something that we did not have for much of our history) and skimming from the SS trust fund, we STILL overspend!
The only way to kill our debt is to kill our spending and keep our federal government within its Constitutional mandates.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2011 10:48:15 GMT -5
False. As a percentage of Japan's GDP, yes. However, the United States is deeper in actual debt than any nation ever has been in the course of human history. Nations a lot less broke than we are now have collapsed.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 3, 2011 11:10:18 GMT -5
.. The only way to kill our debt is to kill our spending and keep our federal government within its Constitutional mandates. To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html Does our current military structure fall within the intent of this mandate?
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Apr 3, 2011 11:49:02 GMT -5
Oh, and how healthy were those other country's economies before the current recession? And how well have they fared after the recession? Sorry, your argument sucks...higher debt means better economy to you are what??
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Apr 3, 2011 11:52:42 GMT -5
Yup, and Japan's and many others are much worse than ours. We might be out of this by now without Pub fear mongering and pure politics and stupid Voodoo, AND this was all their fault... My god, the ignorance on the left is purely hysterical...they think the pubs are the only reason we have a huge recession and crappy economy. If democrats had had pure control for the past few decades we would already have been in the dumpster (over 100% debt over GDP, denifintely). Just look at Carter's admin for christ's sake...the economy got worse every year he was in office!
|
|
safeharbor37
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 23:18:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by safeharbor37 on Apr 3, 2011 14:24:25 GMT -5
Japan is a poor example as they've been in a recession [depression] for over a decade. Who wants that? The current economic/fiscal "crisis" is worldwide and has been brewing [again] for decades. There's hardly any country that the US can use as a model. Most countries are smaller and more homogeneous than the US and those that aren't aren't as prosperous, much less more prosperous, as the US. The genesis of our current difficulties lies in overspending. Simple, we spent too much. Now we have two views; 1] continue and increase spending and increase taxes or 2] cut spending [and, if possible, taxation] to encourage economic growth. The easy way out is to continue spending until we're bankrupt and have no choice ~ relieving those in power of the necessity to make hard decisions. The hard way is to cut spending, but even that won't work unless everyone is on board. It' a conundrum. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Unfortunately, the Democrats, et al, have sold their bill of goods on the basis that there is plenty of money if the rich would just release their greedy grip. Unfortunately also is that many Republicans have taken the easy way out, practicing give aways as a means to election just like the Democrats. The people therefore are faced with choices of doing with less and paying more or kicking the problem down the road. It's perversely humorous that those who yell most about "burdening our children" are the same ones who want to continue spending so that our debt in years, not decades, will be unpayable. It is unfortunately the case that democracy will eventually destroy itself due to competing greed of the population. I'd hoped that it wouldn't come so soon. It's been a good run. I wonder how far down the road is the next opportunity for a "great experiment."
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Apr 3, 2011 14:33:57 GMT -5
From the treasury: www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm$13.6 trillion as of 9/30/2010. With a projected deficit of over $1.6 trillion this year, we will have approx. $15.2 trillion by 9/30/2011. This is the current clock with verifiable sources: www.usdebtclock.org/We're just about to hit the 100% of GDP. More important is the unfunded liabilities that are not part of the national debt due to government accounting. Funny that the government forced companies to put post retirement benefits on their balance sheet but they continue to avoid doing so themselves. The unfunded liabilities from social programs is over $113 trillion dollars, or over $1m per tax payer. This is what is causing all the commotion about government employees and bargaining rights. The post retirement benefits cannot and will not be paid. The piper is coming to get paid in the next 25 years as the boomers retire and governments at all levels are restructuring to give the citizens [workers included] the big FU. You can try and make it partisan but it's not. The money just isn't there. You also may note that the government [federal, state and local] spends $0.46 for every $1.00 that the country earns. That is crushing to an economy that is struggling to rejuvenate itself. No wonder unemployment is still near 20%.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Apr 3, 2011 14:36:06 GMT -5
Lets compare are deficit to the cost of the Japanese disaster, top end it is likely to cost 300billion, that is only a few months of our deficit.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 14:48:24 GMT -5
Pubs did produce the housing bubble that started this Great Recession, OBVIOUSLY. Voodoo did work, I GUESS, to get us out of that recession, but as a continuing policy it has been disastrous, serving only to bloat the mega rich. TAX THE UBER RICH!! I'll go with Paul Krugman now (above). "The massive inflation and oil crisis of the 1970s damaged Jimmy Carter's presidency. In Jimmy Carter's Economy, Carl Biven traces how the Carter administration developed and implemented economic policy amid multiple crises and explores how a combination of factors beyond the administration's control came to dictate a new paradigm of Democratic Party politics.
Jimmy Carter inherited a deeply troubled economy. Inflation had been on the rise since the Johnson years, and the oil crisis Carter faced was the second oil price shock of the decade. In addition, a decline in worker productivity and a rise in competition from Germany and Japan compounded the nation's economic problems. The resulting anti-inflation policy that was forced on Carter included controlling public spending, limiting the expansion of the welfare state, and postponing popular tax cuts. Moreover, according to Biven, Carter argued that the ambitious policies of the Great Society were no longer possible in an age of limits and that the Democratic Party must by economic necessity become more centrist."
Carter couldn't get the Teddie led Congress to cooperate after eight years of Pub policies.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Apr 3, 2011 14:54:19 GMT -5
You keep believing that nonsense. If only we would have reigned in those GSE's in 2003 like some politicians wanted...
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 15:23:54 GMT -5
.. The only way to kill our debt is to kill our spending and keep our federal government within its Constitutional mandates. To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html Does our current military structure fall within the intent of this mandate? OMG, someone actually using information in this debate? Awesome! +1! I'll be honest, I'm not really sure how that works. I need to do some research. That said, even conceding your point, does this not also validate the other issues that we bring forth: that we spend way too much money because the federal government exceeds the constitution and if that includes the military then YES we must bring it in line with the Constitution! In the meantime, let's look into bringing the military back and downsizing it a bit. I want a strong military with cutting edge tech such that we can annihilate anyone BUT I'm sick of defending Europe, Japan, and putting American lives and treasure on the line in the name of "humanitarian" causes. The world claims that we are too much in everyone else's business so let's listen to them! Let the rest fo the world defend itself! In the meantime, if anyone attacks us, we just level them and bar their citizens from coming to this nation. And no rebuilding either. Let your burned out buildings and stacks of corpses tell the world the following: DON'T MESS WITH AMERICA!!!!
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 15:25:06 GMT -5
+1 to BillisonBoard!
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 15:33:51 GMT -5
Yup, and Japan's and many others are much worse than ours. We might be out of this by now without Pub fear mongering and pure politics and stupid Voodoo, AND this was all their fault... My god, the ignorance on the left is purely hysterical...they think the pubs are the only reason we have a huge recession and crappy economy. If democrats had had pure control for the past few decades we would already have been in the dumpster (over 100% debt over GDP, denifintely). Just look at Carter's admin for christ's sake...the economy got worse every year he was in office! One of the largest factors is that liberal groups strong armed banks into giving out loans to people that the banks were pretty sure couldn't repay them. In return, the banks then repackaged the loans and sold them off (CDO's) to minimize their own liability. The banks were also able to both hold deposits and be investment banks after Bill Clinton helped to repeal Glass-Steagall which allowed the banks to sell the CDO's. Barney Frank claimed that Fannie and Freddie Mac were sound and blocked GOP attempts to review if this was the case. The economy sped along fine under 6 years of Bush and GOP Congress. Then the Democrats came to power in 2007 with its populist rhetoric, attempts to regulate business and industry, spread the wealth around, tax and spend, etc... The mostly liberal media hyped how bad the economy was just in time to make the GOP look bad and help out Democrats in the 2008 election. Yet, despite all this, the GOP is somehow all at fault.
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Apr 3, 2011 15:35:48 GMT -5
"OMG, someone actually using information in this debate? Awesome!" Military spending doesnt count against the country's money problems. I am not sure why, but ex-pat is here. Maybe he can explain it. I was just complimenting BB for actually having a nice exchange of information rather than being emotional and bombastic. While it's possible that we could see some savings if we reduce the military, the biggest chunk of the spending issue is without a doubt social spending, wealth transfers, and the federal government intruding in Constitutionally impermissable areas.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 15:38:17 GMT -5
Tax the rich, downsize military bases...works for me. But Krugman and I agree austerity doesn't help the economy and jobs, and the Debt isn't as bad as Pubs fear monger simply to get elected and screw the workers and the unemployed.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Apr 3, 2011 16:34:07 GMT -5
I think your comment is from my prior statements that the military spending less significant compared to other problems we have financially. I definitely wouldn't say it doesn't contribute at all to the country's money problems. I think we should be charging countries with interest for our military expertise and assistance. We definitely shouldn't be picking up the full tab. We should also reduce forces and occupation in every country in the world. The defense spending for 2011 is estimated to be just under $1 trillion, which is over $200bn higher than defense spending 2 years ago. www.usgovernmentspending.com/I think everyone would agree that we need at least a certain amount of defense spending. The question is how much can we cut from that $1 trillion we're spending now? $700bn maybe at most? We have $113 trillion of unfunded liabilities. That $700bn savings in defense spending, if entirely redirected to social program liabilities, would take over 161 years to pay off the unfunded liabilities. I believe that defense spending needs to be decreased, but defense spending is the starbucks line item of our budget that has us spending more than 100% of our income on pensions, healthcare and welfare.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 17:47:21 GMT -5
"Many people, myself included and probably you, think that medicare/medicaid is not sustainable."
You are sorely misled by Pubs, especially if Health Reform is implemented, and Pubs actually follow through on their ideas (and the Dems', ie national exchange, malpractice) and don't just use them to stall and obstruct.I'll go with the Nobel prize winner, not bought off high school grads (Beck and Rush, etc...Too much austerity is a bad idea.
Here's a good rule for you. Greedy mega rich pubs are always wrong, and trying to pull something, in this case breaking the workers and keeping health care a cruel racket. You're fear mongered and awash in details, missing the big picture.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Apr 3, 2011 19:33:39 GMT -5
"By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: March 31, 2011 “Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.” That, according to Herbert Hoover, was the advice he received from Andrew Mellon, the Treasury secretary, as America plunged into depression. To be fair, there’s some question about whether Mellon actually said that; all we have is Hoover’s version, written many years later. But one thing is clear: Mellon-style liquidationism is now the official doctrine of the G.O.P. Two weeks ago, Republican staff at the Congressional Joint Economic Committee released a report, “Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy,” that argued that slashing government spending and employment in the face of a deeply depressed economy would actually create jobs. In part, they invoked the aid of the confidence fairy; more on that in a minute. But the leading argument was pure Mellon. So that’s the state of policy debate in the world’s greatest nation: one party has embraced 80-year-old economic fallacies, while the other has lost the will to fight. And American families will pay the price. ....And vote for Obama, and taxes on the rich and jobs programs, as opposed to Pubs' crusade against good jobs and opportunity for the non rich... -- Google Krugman, see NYTimes
|
|