bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 .... They simply arent smart enough to manage a balance sheet, and theyve been living on easy borrowed money for so long its all they know. Careful...or you will condemn Keynesian economics altogether. It's not about Democrats or Republicans...or even the USA. Many nations are battling the same demographic and entitlement monster, many without any of the "wild spending" of American programs or overseas adventures. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 The numbers are in: The treasury takes in about $200 billion dollars in revenue each month. Debt payments are about $25 billion dollars per month. That leaves $175 billion dollars. There's no reason social security, Medicare and veterans benefits can't be paid. In other words, Obama's a big fat liar and fearmongerer. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 The numbers are in: It wasn't hard to figure out that the variation in tax revenues from a sagging economy, outlays, and borrowing won't just suddenly blow up. Mr. Treasury Secretary...do your job! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Only 15% of the monthly federal revenue needs to go to pay the debt. In other words, Obama's a big fat liar and fearmongerer. Nothing is going to collapse. Not even close. Quote
dre Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 The numbers are in: The treasury takes in about $200 billion dollars in revenue each month. Debt payments are about $25 billion dollars per month. That leaves $175 billion dollars. There's no reason social security, Medicare and veterans benefits can't be paid. In other words, Obama's a big fat liar and fearmongerer. Well HOLD THE PRESSES! Shady has discovered a politician that lies and fear mongers :lol: Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Shady Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) Oh, and it's been 805 days since Democrats In congress have submitted an actual budget. First time in over 30 Years either party has done that. Edited July 14, 2011 by Shady Quote
Smallc Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) Looks like the whiner-in-chief gettin pretty testy. I'd walk out on the current Republicans too. They won't budge an inch, not even when it comes to closing loop holes for corporate jet depreciation. He should call their bluff, and not make any kind of deal. Edited July 14, 2011 by Smallc Quote
punked Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 The numbers are in: The treasury takes in about $200 billion dollars in revenue each month. Debt payments are about $25 billion dollars per month. That leaves $175 billion dollars. There's no reason social security, Medicare and veterans benefits can't be paid. In other words, Obama's a big fat liar and fearmongerer. Wow you are dumb. 200 billion in revenue a month is 56% of what it cost to run the government. Here is what SS, Medicare, Vets Benefits, and defense cost of the pie 75-80%. BTW I didn't include justice. So Shady wants to cut SS, fire every solider, open all the state Pens and let out all the criminals, oh and not be able to mail out those SS check. No one is fearmongering you just can't add and know nothing about the structure of US costs. 175m billion doesn't have the same meaning when you realize the US spends around 340 Billion SS, Medicare, Defense, and Vets making up 80% of it you know 275 billion Shady. So 200 billion doesn't cut it want to try again? I guess Shady fires all the troops. Quote
punked Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Well HOLD THE PRESSES! Shady has discovered a politician that lies and fear mongers :lol: Not this time. Any idiot can do the math and see it doesn't work out. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 ....open all the state Pens and let out all the criminals... "state pens" are not principally a federal outlay...try again. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Are you suggesting that you want a repeat of the depression era? Are you suggesting it's possible to avoid another one? And don't forget we've got an ecological bottleneck to get through too. We've long overshot the point where turning back is an option. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
pinko Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Are you suggesting it's possible to avoid another one? And don't forget we've got an ecological bottleneck to get through too. We've long overshot the point where turning back is an option. That remains to be seen. Most of the discussion here revolves around the personalities involved in the current impasse. The only issue there appears to be a consensus on is that the debt ceiling must be raised or there will be dire circumstances. I am wondering if you could expand on the ecological bottleneck mentioned in your post. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 That is from the Republican leadership. Translation? "F--k the US and its economy I just don't want to lose elections." It is much worse than that. Those in high government - in mid management postions - and their huge team of bureacrats who are all paid by the average American people expect the common guy to take the fall as per usual. From what I understand if they do not come to a viable agreement that social security (pensions) -- military pay rolls....veterans benefits will be effected. You would think that all those in goverment in America especially those in the higher end...all have high incomes - and most if not all are very wealthy people to begin with. What the debate seems to be about is how do we maintain this upper class and still pay off the people who put us here and support us though their labour past and present? If this wealthy bunch of men and woman were really public servants rather than users of the American nation - they would perhaps cut their own salaries in half and make sure that the most vulnerable and those that they are morally beholding too..get their damned hard earned pension cheques. In the over view it looks like the bickering is all about some privledge folks in positions of political authority - desperately trying to have their cake and eat it two - Instead of cutting the throats of the most vulnerable why don't they cut their own throats just a little and bleed out some of that needed money? This debate should be about pension reform and not the debt ceiling - Pensions are in effect a type of life savings . If a person has a few million in the bank - They should live on that money till they die - It makes no sense that everyone gets a pension. Why should the American millionare who is secure till death get money that they don't need? Let those who truely need the survival cash have it and those that don't let that money go into paying off the national debt. Quote
pinko Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 A GOP aide told Reuters after Wednesday's meeting that the president would not renegotiate his bottom line as to what he would compromise in the ongoing discussions. According to the aide Obama said, "I have reached the point where I say enough." He reportedly added, "Would Ronald Reagan be sitting here? I've reached my limit. This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this." The AP reports that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke issued a warning to lawmakers on Wednesday that failing to strike a deal and allowing the country to default on its debt would send "shock waves through the entire financial system." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/13/obama-debt-ceiling-meeting_n_897815.html?utm_campaign=071311&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-politics&utm_content=FullStory I know this has already been addressed. I think Obama has taken the right stance. Unless common ground is identified on or before August2, 2011 there will be substantial disloaction. Quote
eyeball Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) That remains to be seen. Most of the discussion here revolves around the personalities involved in the current impasse. The only issue there appears to be a consensus on is that the debt ceiling must be raised or there will be dire circumstances. I am wondering if you could expand on the ecological bottleneck mentioned in your post. It borrows from the phrase population bottleneck - its a point in time and space in which everything and everyone has to squeeze through a narrowing of ecological opportunities. Think of a shrinking water-hole, when they get smaller the animals get meaner and many of course perish in the attempt to survive and never make it through the period of drought. A lower ceiling implies a narrow passage. The last time we came through a depression we still basically had a planet for the taking and a reasonable population level, now we don't. The next bottleneck will be an even tighter squeeze with no where near as much to look forward to in terms of the natural capital we'll need when we emerge from the other side. Edited July 14, 2011 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Oleg Bach Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 It borrows from the phrase population bottleneck - its a point in time and space in which everything and everyone has to squeeze through a narrowing of ecological opportunities. Think of a shrinking water-hole, when they get smaller the animals get meaner and many of course perish in the attempt to survive and never make it through the period of drought. A lower ceiling implies a narrow passage. The last time we came through a depression we still basically had a planet for the taking and a reasonable population level, now we don't. The next bottleneck will be an even tighter squeeze with no where near as much to look forward to in terms of the natural capital we'll need when we emerge from the other side. The rich are not about to make any consessions. They will like lunitics go down with the ship and take everyone with them. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 The rich are not about to make any consessions. They will like lunitics go down with the ship and take everyone with them. Why should they? It's not like the "poor" are going to solve the problem by cashing in their food stamps. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Why should they? It's not like the "poor" are going to solve the problem by cashing in their food stamps. If you create a society where all we have is a privledged class of 1% - and the rest are eating cold noodles and salt - eventually the whole thing will crash...who is going to do the real work - the pick and shovel stuff - certainly not the rich...but of course they will ship in some super cheap labour to take care of the infrastructure - and abandon those that built the nation - those that fought for the nation...You over estimate the intelligence of the privledged...if they were as smart as you assume - they would not have this problem _ I would say unless you guys get on this and fix it...you are doomed. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) ....You over estimate the intelligence of the privledged...if they were as smart as you assume - they would not have this problem _ I would say unless you guys get on this and fix it...you are doomed. Then we are "doomed"...so be it. It's not the end of the world. Why are the Americans "doomed" over all others in far worse circumstance? Have Canadians been living in the shadow so long, they don't know anything different? Edited July 14, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
pinko Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) It borrows from the phrase population bottleneck - its a point in time and space in which everything and everyone has to squeeze through a narrowing of ecological opportunities. Think of a shrinking water-hole, when they get smaller the animals get meaner and many of course perish in the attempt to survive and never make it through the period of drought. A lower ceiling implies a narrow passage. The last time we came through a depression we still basically had a planet for the taking and a reasonable population level, now we don't. The next bottleneck will be an even tighter squeeze with no where near as much to look forward to in terms of the natural capital we'll need when we emerge from the other side. Thanks for the clarification. If I am not mistaken the population is expected to crest at about 10 or 11 billion by 2050. At that time I will most likely be in the past tense. Environmental degradation is a concern of mine too. Edited July 14, 2011 by pinko Quote
pinko Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 Then we are "doomed"...so be it. It's not the end of the world. Why are the Americans "doomed" over all others in far worse circumstance? Have Canadians been living in the shadow so long, they don't know anything different? Nice deflection. It is a worldwide problem. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 (edited) Nice deflection. It is a worldwide problem. What is a "worldwide problem"? The American debt ceiling? Are you saying that the "world" can only survive if America continues to expand its deficits and debt? Edited July 14, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 What is a "worldwide problem"? The American debt ceiling? Are you saying that the "world" can only survive if America continues to expand its deficits and debt? The world will survive even if America sinks and is covered by a new ocean.. Humanity is not dependant on any nation ...This panic is making the comfortable uncomfortable - a hard chair never killed anyone - so relax...and BC - it's just fake money anyway. Quote
pinko Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 What is a "worldwide problem"? The American debt ceiling? Are you saying that the "world" can only survive if America continues to expand its deficits and debt? I guess you haven't been following the discussion. It is about the current state of financial uncertainty and other issues worldwide. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 14, 2011 Report Posted July 14, 2011 I guess you haven't been following the discussion. It is about the current state of financial uncertainty and other issues worldwide. Nice deflection....I am challenging you to describe why such a calamity must be avoided with additional American debt, the very thing you will turn around and criticize them for. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.