|
On July 24 2011 06:30 cfoy3 wrote:
@Equity213
Yeh the military should be dialed back. We spend sooo much money on the military. More than the rest of the world combined. That defiantly should be one way we save.
The problem seems to be no one is accountable for the ridiculous military spending or their failed yields to the nation. (Ghost ships - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=246288 - Sure it's not large, but this a few times over very quickly adds up )
So how do you reprimand no single person but the entire system itself; which has been altered to the point where things like this can happen.
Is capitalism fatally flawed? Personally I don't think so if there was no such thing as strategy.
As a competitive person and avid RTS player it has never taken me long to see that the easiest way to "win" capitalism isn't to obey its rules and compete but to instead collaborate - Who cares if there's competition if both parties can make billions AND increase prices?
+ Show Spoiler +Something the fathers of economics knew and warned about, leading to many laws regulating banking/business to protect the capitalism ideal. Laws which we've allowed to be erased and ignored.
And no I am not a moron; I do not think there exists some secret room or club where these things are decided. It's a simple gamble that the other person can see the plan on their own and will go along on their end.
But what can we do? What SHOULD we have already done? I am so outraged and left feeling so useless.
At what point do the lower-class and the currently poor, angry "middle" class actually snap?
|
On July 24 2011 06:38 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:34 Perihelion wrote:On July 24 2011 06:28 Equity213 wrote:On July 24 2011 06:26 Perihelion wrote:
As a citizen of the United States, I don't think that the current debt level is a big deal. Ok awsome, so will you be paying your $46,000 in cash or cheque? As a citizen of the United States, I will never be directly personally responsible for my government's debt. Framing the debt in such a way is quite silly. You will be paying it whether you realize it or not. You'll either pay it in taxes (at least if you get a job and work for the next 25 years) or you'll pay it in shitty services from the government because they don't have the money to build proper roads, run proper schools, etc.
Which is why I said "directly".
Most of the money for roads and schools comes from state governments, not the federal government.
I don't think that current debt levels will cause a shortage of government spending in areas that affect me.
And as for running proper schools, we already don't do that.
|
On July 24 2011 06:44 jmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:30 cfoy3 wrote:
@Equity213
Yeh the military should be dialed back. We spend sooo much money on the military. More than the rest of the world combined. That defiantly should be one way we save. The problem seems to be no one is accountable for the ridiculous military spending or their failed yields to the nation. (Ghost ships - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=246288 - Sure it's not large, but this a few times over very quickly adds up ) So how do you reprimand no single person but the entire system itself; which has been altered to the point where things like this can happen. Is capitalism fatally flawed? Personally I don't think so if there was no such thing as strategy. As a competitive person and avid RTS player it has never taken me long to see that the easiest way to "win" capitalism isn't to obey its rules and compete but to instead collaborate - Who cares if there's competition if both parties can make billions AND increase prices? And no I am not a moron; I do not think there exists some secret room or club where these things are decided. It's a simple gamble that the other person can see the plan on their own and will go along on their end. But what can we do? What SHOULD we have already done? I am so outraged and left feeling so useless. At what point do the lower-class and the currently poor, angry "middle" class actually snap?
It's worth mentioning that a crucial component of fundamental Marxism requires that capitalism be allowed to run its course, ending with an inevitable break between the proletariat and the upper class. Not that I'm a Marxist or that you are, your comments just sounded eerily familiar haha.
|
On July 24 2011 06:39 cfoy3 wrote:
@Perihelion
To truly believe that this debt will not come back to bite us or have lasting repercussions on us. Repercussions that you should be aware of and at least know about is the epitome of foolishness.
The current debt is only 100% of GDP. It's not that high.
|
@ ziggurat
You know I truly believed in Barack Obama. I was behind him one hundred percent. Here was a man that was talking sense. However, for all his speeches, his actions betray him. His health care law, was so violently opposed by Republicans because it was soo partisan. Even now, the Democrats completely reject Cut,Cap and Balance, tabling it so it can't even be amended or debated. The republicans where wrong to draft such an ill conceived legislation. It was sooo partisan. No adjustments for the tax code really? Capping at 18%, why 18? Now I don't think it should be 18% but it should be a number maybe 90%. then they tact on an amendment that would basically stop Congress from being able to impose new taxes and make it impossible for us to respond to crisis, such as a war or economic catastrophe. Their should have been some provision to allow the amendment to be ignored, if there is an x% number of votes in congress or state of emergency. That bill was ultra conservative. But it didnt have to remain that way. The senate could have amended it and made it truly bi-partisan, but they didnt. Including some of the considerations from the gang of 6.NO ONE IS BLAMELESS. The democrats where being just as political and partisan. They all need to go!
|
I've always found it funny that europe was able to wash its hands of the debt it had to america after WW2 and from WW1 but now we're expected to pay it off ourselves.
Not really a problem if we default our loans to other countries actually not like they can do anything about it other then not loan to us again. Impossible to invade us or assimilate us what else can they threaten us with?
To be fair we got forced into 3ish wars that'll throw a wrench into any attempt to balance the budget and peal back the debt.
|
On July 24 2011 06:39 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:35 aksfjh wrote:On July 24 2011 06:28 farvacola wrote:On July 24 2011 06:26 Equity213 wrote:
Everyones arguing over who should have their money stolen first, but over the 4 pages so far no one has brought up the military spending.
Maybe instead of taxing everyone to death you should close some of those military bases. It is worth mentioning that the American military industrial complex is motivated largely by corporate interests. In other words, incredibly crazy military spending is simply another way the rich are able to make more money. Actually, the military industrial complex is just like any other government expenditure. There's a great number of jobs created by military spending, just like there's a great number of jobs created by discretionary spending on Federal Departments. It can almost be equated to this generation's NASA in terms of innovation and motivation, except it involves killing people more directly. With the amount of money mercenary groups like Blackwater make, while at the same time taking the corporate interests of companies like Haliburton into consideration, the NASA comparison hardly seems appropriate. The US military was used as tool needed to make foreign economies easier to enter and effectively pillage.
But that money still gets spread around to other small businesses as high skilled engineering work, and manufacturing of a lot of this equipment is done by low/unskilled workers. Blackwater is a bad egg, but hardly a reflection of the whole group.
That being said, cuts do need to be made in DoD spending, as well as almost every other dept. of the federal government. Even if these cuts do nothing more than make the heads reevaluate what projects/contracts need to be shelved and what can be considered priority tasks, that would be something great to take away.
|
On July 24 2011 04:25 jmack wrote:It's pretty clear at this point large INTERNATIONAL banks / financial sectors are guilty of fraudulent banking, or at least swindling millions of people out of TRILLIONS and disregarding any respect for their customers interests. Deregulation is retarded. Retarded. Do you know what the word greed means? What did people think would happen if they allowed the greedy to run free? Tax the rich; hard. There should be large government SPENDING not CUTS ( cuts is moronic ). And before anyone claims I don't know what is it I'm talking about let me paint you a picture: You are currently allowing the government to tell you that if the rich get tax CUTS they will create jobs; what jobs? What jobs and where are they? Deregulation and wealthy tax cuts have been around for a decade and now that the bubble has burst it's clear the attempt was a complete failure. With that in mind, you're allowing your ELECTED officials to present more ideas following the same broken logic. No corporation can create jobs if there's no demand for their product ( regardless of how much the company pays it's CEO's ) IF THE PEOPLE WHO BUY THE PRODUCTS HAVE NO MONEY. A serious move towards a socialist ( don't be ignorant and overreact to the word; go do some research and tell me it isn't a more ideal system we should be striving to move toward ) nation is a great way to actually recover the economy. This is not just information I am posting on TL forums; it is being screamed at you by those stuck behind the main stream cable media. No matter what your beliefs, no matter what they are; I have a hard time believing ANYONE supports the notion that millions should go hungry/poor while working 60hrs a week for minimum wage while CEO's of THE BANKS collect half billion dollar bonuses for doing nothing. The banks and their CEO's are the modern day version of medieval lords of land, seemingly immune to the law and collecting absurd wages based on the misuse and exploitation of their slaves. Yes we're slaves; we're slaves living on the illusion that we're free and that one day we can be the "wealthy". I look forward to your views, discussing them and reflecting on my own. + Show Spoiler +Yes I am angry and disgusted. The more I learn about our system the sweeter the word "revolution" sounds.
Any discussion here needs to keep in mind that 70% of students drop out before senior year in high school, and 70% of seniors go to college, which means roughly 50% of the US gets any college education. Most students in college don't major in a rigorous science (and most of them who do will do poorly. Isn't it depressing how introduction to chemistry is the easiest science class offered at the college but is considered a weedout class?), and definitely, will not take even an introductory economics or statistics class, and therefore, will have no understanding of these topics, paired with a complete incompetence in scientific rigorous thought.
So paint the picture: MOST people in the US don't understand statistics or economics. A full HALF of the people in the US didn't perform well enough on the SAT (which, quite frankly, is a very easy test) to get into college. What do you need on the SAT to get into ANY state college?
And now you expect these people who can't figure out questions like "sparrow:bird::salmon ? " to make complicated decisions in macroeconomics and finance (lol finance?).
We need to keep in mind that the concept of democracy and its hayday was back in the 1700s when the world was simple as hell and a middle school education pretty much put you on the frontier of knowledge, which meant that most people were able to attain that status. Now, to be good enough to make any serious decisions, you need to have a PhD in international monetary theory or macroeconomics or finance, and even PhDs will openly admit that they aren't entirely sure.
1. give power to every US citizen via vote
2. give a nation of high school level citizens try to make decisions that even PhDs openly admit are complicated, but with huge repercussions if done wrong.
3. ???
4. profit!
|
On July 24 2011 06:45 Perihelion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:38 ziggurat wrote:On July 24 2011 06:34 Perihelion wrote:On July 24 2011 06:28 Equity213 wrote:On July 24 2011 06:26 Perihelion wrote:
As a citizen of the United States, I don't think that the current debt level is a big deal. Ok awsome, so will you be paying your $46,000 in cash or cheque? As a citizen of the United States, I will never be directly personally responsible for my government's debt. Framing the debt in such a way is quite silly. You will be paying it whether you realize it or not. You'll either pay it in taxes (at least if you get a job and work for the next 25 years) or you'll pay it in shitty services from the government because they don't have the money to build proper roads, run proper schools, etc. Which is why I said "directly". Most of the money for roads and schools comes from state governments, not the federal government. I don't think that current debt levels will cause a shortage of government spending in areas that affect me. And as for running proper schools, we already don't do that.
The federal government contributes a lot of money to state budgets for roads and schools. And you're right that they many school systems are bad, but imagine how much worse it can get!
I don't see how you think government debt won't affect you. If you work for a living then you'll have to pay a lot of extra taxes ... if you're a bum then you'll get crappy welfare benefits ... so what kind of life do you plan to lead where you won't be affected? The only people I see not being affected are wealthy retirees who have the means to move to a country with lower taxes!
|
On July 24 2011 06:49 sermokala wrote:
I've always found it funny that europe was able to wash its hands of the debt it had to america after WW2 and from WW1 but now we're expected to pay it off ourselves.
Not really a problem if we default our loans to other countries actually not like they can do anything about it other then not loan to us again. Impossible to invade us or assimilate us what else can they threaten us with?
Actually, defaulting on the loans would be a huge problem. If no one was buying our debt, we'd have no money to spend. And that would be a bad situation.
|
On July 24 2011 06:44 jmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:30 cfoy3 wrote:
@Equity213
Yeh the military should be dialed back. We spend sooo much money on the military. More than the rest of the world combined. That defiantly should be one way we save. The problem seems to be no one is accountable for the ridiculous military spending or their failed yields to the nation. (Ghost ships - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=246288 - Sure it's not large, but this a few times over very quickly adds up ) So how do you reprimand no single person but the entire system itself; which has been altered to the point where things like this can happen. Is capitalism fatally flawed? Personally I don't think so if there was no such thing as strategy. As a competitive person and avid RTS player it has never taken me long to see that the easiest way to "win" capitalism isn't to obey its rules and compete but to instead collaborate - Who cares if there's competition if both parties can make billions AND increase prices? + Show Spoiler +Something the fathers of economics knew and warned about, leading to many laws regulating banking/business to protect the capitalism ideal. Laws which we've allowed to be erased and ignored. And no I am not a moron; I do not think there exists some secret room or club where these things are decided. It's a simple gamble that the other person can see the plan on their own and will go along on their end. But what can we do? What SHOULD we have already done? I am so outraged and left feeling so useless. At what point do the lower-class and the currently poor, angry "middle" class actually snap?
All this sounds like red communist talk to me. I am not sure what your problem is. I'm not sure what you are saying either but you sound like a terrorist to me.
|
On July 24 2011 06:49 cfoy3 wrote:
@ ziggurat
You know I truly believed in Barack Obama. I was behind him one hundred percent. Here was a man that was talking sense. However, for all his speeches, his actions betray him. His health care law, was so violently opposed by Republicans because it was soo partisan. Even now, the Democrats completely reject Cut,Cap and Balance, tabling it so it can't even be amended or debated. The republicans where wrong to draft such an ill conceived legislation. It was sooo partisan. No adjustments for the tax code really? Capping at 18%, why 18? Now I don't think it should be 18% but it should be a number maybe 90%. then they tact on an amendment that would basically stop Congress from being able to impose new taxes and make it impossible for us to respond to crisis, such as a war or economic catastrophe. Their should have been some provision to allow the amendment to be ignored, if there is an x% number of votes in congress or state of emergency. That bill was ultra conservative. But it didnt have to remain that way. The senate could have amended it and made it truly bi-partisan, but they didnt. Including some of the considerations from the gang of 6.NO ONE IS BLAMELESS. The democrats where being just as political and partisan. They all need to go!
This is such a funny post.
The Patient Protection Care Act was partisan?
Let's see....there's this law in Massachusetts passed by a Republican named Mitt Romney..maybe you've heard of him.
It has a system to increase competitiveness, an individual mandate that requires citizens to opt into a policy, as well as punishments for those refuse to cooperate.
Ring a bell?
|
On July 24 2011 06:53 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:45 Perihelion wrote:On July 24 2011 06:38 ziggurat wrote:On July 24 2011 06:34 Perihelion wrote:On July 24 2011 06:28 Equity213 wrote:On July 24 2011 06:26 Perihelion wrote:
As a citizen of the United States, I don't think that the current debt level is a big deal. Ok awsome, so will you be paying your $46,000 in cash or cheque? As a citizen of the United States, I will never be directly personally responsible for my government's debt. Framing the debt in such a way is quite silly. You will be paying it whether you realize it or not. You'll either pay it in taxes (at least if you get a job and work for the next 25 years) or you'll pay it in shitty services from the government because they don't have the money to build proper roads, run proper schools, etc. Which is why I said "directly". Most of the money for roads and schools comes from state governments, not the federal government. I don't think that current debt levels will cause a shortage of government spending in areas that affect me. And as for running proper schools, we already don't do that. The federal government contributes a lot of money to state budgets for roads and schools. And you're right that they many school systems are bad, but imagine how much worse it can get! I don't see how you think government debt won't affect you. If you work for a living then you'll have to pay a lot of extra taxes ... if you're a bum then you'll get crappy welfare benefits ... so what kind of life do you plan to lead where you won't be affected? The only people I see not being affected are wealthy retirees who have the means to move to a country with lower taxes!
The federal government contributes quite a bit to highways, sure. But most of the money for roads come from states. And the school system would be a lot better off without Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind. Without federal spending on schools, the situation might actually improve.
I don't see taxes being increased to absurd levels, and right now, our tax levels are very low, so even if they were to increase, I'd be fine with that. I would still have no problems leading the life I plan to lead, so it's not a big deal to me. The debt isn't at a crisis level, so there won't be any extreme measures taken. That's why I'm not worried in the least.
|
1. give power to every US citizen via vote
2. give a nation of high school level citizens try to make decisions that even PhDs openly admit are complicated, but with huge repercussions if done wrong.
3. ???
4. profit!
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
|
On July 24 2011 06:55 Perihelion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:49 sermokala wrote:
I've always found it funny that europe was able to wash its hands of the debt it had to america after WW2 and from WW1 but now we're expected to pay it off ourselves.
Not really a problem if we default our loans to other countries actually not like they can do anything about it other then not loan to us again. Impossible to invade us or assimilate us what else can they threaten us with? Actually, defaulting on the loans would be a huge problem. If no one was buying our debt, we'd have no money to spend. And that would be a bad situation.
No debt means no debt payments means we can have a balanced budget? we can effectvily loan to ourselves in a bigger pinch.
|
i read in a paper today that something like 96% of americas GDP was in debt, if is true and nothing is done about it and americas economy collapase it will send a shockwave crashing countless other countries economies
 bad times
|
On July 24 2011 07:01 Zergneedsfood wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:49 cfoy3 wrote:
@ ziggurat
You know I truly believed in Barack Obama. I was behind him one hundred percent. Here was a man that was talking sense. However, for all his speeches, his actions betray him. His health care law, was so violently opposed by Republicans because it was soo partisan. Even now, the Democrats completely reject Cut,Cap and Balance, tabling it so it can't even be amended or debated. The republicans where wrong to draft such an ill conceived legislation. It was sooo partisan. No adjustments for the tax code really? Capping at 18%, why 18? Now I don't think it should be 18% but it should be a number maybe 90%. then they tact on an amendment that would basically stop Congress from being able to impose new taxes and make it impossible for us to respond to crisis, such as a war or economic catastrophe. Their should have been some provision to allow the amendment to be ignored, if there is an x% number of votes in congress or state of emergency. That bill was ultra conservative. But it didnt have to remain that way. The senate could have amended it and made it truly bi-partisan, but they didnt. Including some of the considerations from the gang of 6.NO ONE IS BLAMELESS. The democrats where being just as political and partisan. They all need to go! This is such a funny post. The Patient Protection Care Act was partisan? Let's see....there's this law in Massachusetts passed by a Republican named Mitt Romney..maybe you've heard of him. It has a system to increase competitiveness, an individual mandate that requires citizens to opt into a policy, as well as punishments for those refuse to cooperate. Ring a bell?
I think what he means is that zero Republicans voted for it. If there had been Republican support it would have been bi-partisan. Since there wasn't, it was partisan.
|
Dude no one's shrugging this shit off. The ganja suppliers I visit talk about the financial turmoil. When shit like THAT happens, you know shits just about to hit the fan.
|
On July 24 2011 07:01 Zergneedsfood wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 06:49 cfoy3 wrote:
@ ziggurat
You know I truly believed in Barack Obama. I was behind him one hundred percent. Here was a man that was talking sense. However, for all his speeches, his actions betray him. His health care law, was so violently opposed by Republicans because it was soo partisan. Even now, the Democrats completely reject Cut,Cap and Balance, tabling it so it can't even be amended or debated. The republicans where wrong to draft such an ill conceived legislation. It was sooo partisan. No adjustments for the tax code really? Capping at 18%, why 18? Now I don't think it should be 18% but it should be a number maybe 90%. then they tact on an amendment that would basically stop Congress from being able to impose new taxes and make it impossible for us to respond to crisis, such as a war or economic catastrophe. Their should have been some provision to allow the amendment to be ignored, if there is an x% number of votes in congress or state of emergency. That bill was ultra conservative. But it didnt have to remain that way. The senate could have amended it and made it truly bi-partisan, but they didnt. Including some of the considerations from the gang of 6.NO ONE IS BLAMELESS. The democrats where being just as political and partisan. They all need to go! This is such a funny post. The Patient Protection Care Act was partisan? Let's see....there's this law in Massachusetts passed by a Republican named Mitt Romney..maybe you've heard of him. It has a system to increase competitiveness, an individual mandate that requires citizens to opt into a policy, as well as punishments for those refuse to cooperate. Ring a bell?
It was debated in a Super majority controlled senate and a majority controlled (no such need for a super majority in) congress. Democrats wanted to have all the glory in the world and have the largest advantage anyones ever seen with passing health care reform making everything morning in america again.
Also that law failed and they had to repeal it in less then a year. :3
|
a lot of people here just don't understand how money works, what it is and what it represents.
the problem isn't repaying debt, at all, the Fed could print enough money in a blink, trust me Greece wishes it was in the US's situation now, they can't print and that's much more of a problem.
The US has two options, depreciating the dollar and pushing inflation to record highs by repaying debt through monetary expansion, loosing power as world currency, and causing insane turmoil in the US economy and the global trading balance, oooooooooor, they can cut expenses, pull up taxes, and repay the debt with revenue and everything's cool.
I honestly personally find the defence budget ridiculous, and would start there, even though none of us here have extensive knowledge of where the money goes, I'm certain they could cut down expenses without loosing global power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
