Scotty Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Yes. No other leaders have to. Because it's all about the U.S. No one else has to take responsibility for their actions. Because the U.S. is more powerful. Got'cha. When Pop's corner bank, in Podunk, Wyoming goes bankrupt, the effect on anyone outside the immediate neighborhood is negligible. When Lehman Brothers goes bankrupt, an institution which owes money in the tens of billions to banks all around the world goes under, the effects are massive. When Greece has trouble paying its bills due to government incompetence and the ignorance of its citizenry the effects can be ameliorated by other nations. When the United States has trouble paying its bills due to government incompetence and the ignorance of its citizenry the effects are massive because it's "too big to fail". Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 As I've said earlier, the problems in the U.S. have nothing to do with its miserly entitlement programs and everything to do with an ignorant citizenry which persists in believing it's paying taxes which are far too high, even when it's paying the lowest taxes in the western world. Every other modern nation funds more generous social programs, but the Americans won't even pay for the chintzy ones they have. The average American can be pictured as huddled in his back yard with a gun in hand, crouched over his cash, staring around with fierce, paranoid eyes at the world he sees as trying to take what's his. The total tax burden on Americans, as a percentage of gross domestic product, stood at 24 per cent in 2009 – lower than it was in 1965 and still falling. That compares to 31.1 per cent in Canada, 34.3 per cent in Britain, 42 per cent in France, 37 per cent in Germany and 43.5 per cent in Italy. The Japanese, Australians and South Koreans all pay significantly more. The United States is the only major country without a national value-added tax and its sales taxes are lowest in the OECD. Likewise, U.S. fuel and sin taxes are at the bottom among rich countries. And generous tax breaks mean many businesses and individuals pay few taxes, placing a heavy burden on a relatively narrow tax base. U.S. in denial over taxes Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Guest American Woman Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 And you wonder why governments and business all over the world is looking on in contempt? I don't wonder that at all. It's easier than looking inward. Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Posturing about whether and how Congress should increase the debt ceiling by Aug. 2 has been a hollow exercise. Failure to increase the borrowing limit would harm American prestige and the global financial system. But that’s nothing compared with the real threats to the U.S.’s long-term economic health, which will begin to strike with full force toward the end of this decade: Sharply rising per-capita health-care spending, coupled with the graying of the populace; a generation of workers turning into an outsize generation of beneficiaries. Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Michael J. Boskin, who was President George H.W. Bush’s chief economic adviser, says: “The word ‘unsustainable’ doesn’t convey the problem enough, in my opinion.” Even the $4 trillion “grand bargain” on debt reduction hammered out by President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) — a deal that collapsed nearly as quickly as it came together — would not have gotten the U.S. where it needs to be. A June analysis by the Congressional Budget Office concluded that keeping the U.S.’s ratio of debt to gross domestic product at current levels until the year 2085 (to avoid scaring off investors) would require spending cuts, tax hikes or a combination of both equal to 8.3 percent of GDP each year for the next 75 years, vs. the most likely (i.e. “alternative”) scenario. That translates to $15 trillion over the next decade — or more than three times what Obama and Boehner were considering. The term "death by a thousand cuts" seems appropriate... Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 The link for those who insist on these things- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43929476/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ Quote
Bitsy Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 This debate was a politically motivated assault on Obama, which will escalate into a severe recession and the possibility of a depression as we have never experienced in our life time. A responsible congress would have passed a clean debt raising bill as has been done 73 times since 1964 and put the deficit debate where it belongs…separate budget negotiation and fiscal reform. Lifting the ceiling allows our country to pay for past debts approved and incurred by past legislations; reducing spending is for future legislation that can reduce the deficit and, hopefully, prevent ever again raising the debt limit. By attaching spending legislation to this normally accepted procedure by “the adolescent nihilism of Republican right, and the intellectual sloth of the American people” , we now see our nation teetering on the brink of defaulting on our debt obligations something that would have been unheard of in the past. As I write, it's impossible to guess how the latest made-for-TV partisan crisis in Washington will end. We've reached the point where the president of the United States felt he needed to deliver a prime-time speech essentially defending the post-Enlightenment values of reason, evidence and compromise against an obscurantist movement more like a religious cult than a political party.But has President Obama got the guts to deal with the reality facing him? Signs are not encouraging. The standoff has two major components: the adolescent nihilism of the Republican right, and the intellectual sloth of the American people. It's unclear that Obama has the political courage to confront the first, while the White House has scarcely made a serious effort to inform the public what's at stake, and why. How does "deadbeat Republicans" sound? Because the simple fact is that the GOP under George W. Bush put two wars, a Medicare drug benefit, and tax cuts heavily slanted toward the rich on the national credit card. Now that the bill's due, they're planning to skip town and stick Democrats with the charges. http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/07/27/lyons_deadbeat Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 ..... So in answer to your question yes the reckless behaviour on the part of the USA has been and continues to be the primary burden of the USA. But you have yet to answer the question....how/why is it that the "rest of the world" finds itself so dependent on what the Americans decide to do and when to do it? Are you really saying that the Americans must continue to accrue yet more debt just to keep the "world's" economy from collapsing? How did this come to be? Why is America "too big to fail"? When Canada failed back in the 1990's, was it "contemptuous" or just too small to be relevant? Was the Canadian government judged as "broken" and incompetent when it waited for an actual downgrade to fix the problem, complete with bitching and moaning about how "miserly" future spending would be on health care payments to provinces (bitching that continues to this day)? The Americans will deal with their problems in a very American way, just like they always have. It won't be pretty, but that's how it became the country that for you....is "too big to fail". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 .... A responsible congress would have passed a clean debt raising bill as has been done 73 times since 1964 and put the deficit debate where it belongs…separate budget negotiation and fiscal reform. No, a responsible Congress would have never let the US public debt grow to such proportions so quickly in the first place.....since 1964. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) ...I want to know what the United States government spends on behalf of its poor, it's disabled, etc. etc. Those are the entitlement programs I'm talking about. What most other nations call the social safety system. Well, if you want to know something then you should do your own homework. If you had done this you would have learned that using OECD benchmarks, the USA ranks 25th out of 34 OECD countries for social program spending. US public spending is about the same percentage of GDP as Canada (17%), which does not rank in the top 20 either. Country Public Spending (% of GDP) Total Spending (% 0f GDP) France 28.40 28.3 Sweden 27.33 23.6 Austria 26.42 23.0 Belgium 26.35 27.1 Denmark 26.10 21.4 Germany 25.16 25.1 Finland 24.93 20.7 Italy 24.86 22.8 Hungary 23.09 Portugal 22.52 21.7 Spain 21.58 19.5 Greece 21.33 Norway 20.80 18.3 Luxembourg 20.65 17.4 UK 20.54 23.7 Slovenia 20.26 Netherlands 20.08 22.3 Poland 20.01 16.3 OECD (avg) 19.26 19.57 Czech Rep. 18.79 17.5 Japan 18.70 21.6 Switzerland 18.52 New Zealand 18.39 16.5 Canada 16.86 21.4 Ireland 16.31 15.8 USA 16.20 25.6 Australia 16.02 18.7 Slovak Rp. 15.69 15.1 Israel 15.47 Iceland 14.59 16.4 Estonia 13.00 Chile 10.56 Turkey 10.48 9.7 Korea 7.53 10.4 Mexico 7.21 8.1 Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/countries-most-entitlement-spending-2011-4#14-luxembourg-1#ixzz1TcSUtbPK Edited July 30, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
pinko Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 But you have yet to answer the question....how/why is it that the "rest of the world" finds itself so dependent on what the Americans decide to do and when to do it? Are you really saying that the Americans must continue to accrue yet more debt just to keep the "world's" economy from collapsing? How did this come to be? Why is America "too big to fail"? When Canada failed back in the 1990's, was it "contemptuous" or just too small to be relevant? Was the Canadian government judged as "broken" and incompetent when it waited for an actual downgrade to fix the problem, complete with bitching and moaning about how "miserly" future spending would be on health care payments to provinces (bitching that continues to this day)? The Americans will deal with their problems in a very American way, just like they always have. It won't be pretty, but that's how it became the country that for you....is "too big to fail". Time will tell. Quote
Shady Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 No, in fact it's not. Yes, in fact it is. Medicare, medicaid, social security, etc aren't programs for the rich. All those programs constitute a majority of yearly federal spending. It's fact. I'm sorry that facts get in the way of your incorrect premises. Quote
Shady Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 All debts have been paid but after 8/2/11 there will be a process of prioritizing which debt payments will be honored unless No, that's completely wrong. Servicing the debt totals about $29 billion dollars a month. The Federal government will take in revenues totalling almost $200 billion dollars in August. With $85 billion dollars currently on hand. So there is no way any debt payments won't be honored. Unless Obama chooses not to pay them. Quote
dre Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 No, that's completely wrong. Servicing the debt totals about $29 billion dollars a month. The Federal government will take in revenues totalling almost $200 billion dollars in August. With $85 billion dollars currently on hand. So there is no way any debt payments won't be honored. Unless Obama chooses not to pay them. Actually theres a question whether the Treasury even has the constitutional right to prioritize payments. It will depend what kind of legal advice they get. But none of this will happen anyways. Right now the congress is being given a chance to step up and fund their own directed spending. But if they continue to play retarded games, then the whitehouse will simply work around them. Theres a few options available. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Yes, in fact it is. Medicare, medicaid, social security, etc aren't programs for the rich. All those programs constitute a majority of yearly federal spending. It's fact. I'm sorry that facts get in the way of your incorrect premises. No thats false. There is no means test for social security and rich people get the same checks as poor or middle class people. Everyone qualifies as long as they have worked for 10 quarters (2½ years) and paid into Social Security at any time in their life. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
punked Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 No thats false. There is no means test for social security and rich people get the same checks as poor or middle class people. Everyone qualifies as long as they have worked for 10 quarters (2½ years) and paid into Social Security at any time in their life. Medicare isn't really means tested either but Shady doesn't care he just loves to lie. Quote
Scotty Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Well, if you want to know something then you should do your own homework. If you had done this you would have learned that using OECD benchmarks, the USA ranks 25th out of 34 OECD countries for social program spending. US public spending is about the same percentage of GDP as Canada (17%), which does not rank in the top 20 either. While that's bad enough it understates things quite a bit. Why? Because the United States has FAR, FAR more people living in poverty than any other western nation. So while it looks like you're at least better than a few countries in that you spend a certain % of GDP on social welfare programs, that figure is raised, in comparison to most other nations, by the level of poverty in your country. And yes, Canada is far from perfect in that we take after the U.S. far too much. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Yes, in fact it is. Medicare, medicaid, social security, etc aren't programs for the rich. All those programs constitute a majority of yearly federal spending. It's fact. I'm sorry that facts get in the way of your incorrect premises. Medicare is not a program for the poor, and neither is Social Security. Neither one of them is means tested. They're available to all Americans regardless of income. So as I said, you're wrong... again. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) No, that's completely wrong. Servicing the debt totals about $29 billion dollars a month. The Federal government will take in revenues totalling almost $200 billion dollars in August. With $85 billion dollars currently on hand. So there is no way any debt payments won't be honored. Unless Obama chooses not to pay them. You zealots just don't think things through. The United States government has many bills to pay every month. It has a hundred thousand businesses supplying it with goods and services it has to pay. And if it refuses to pay those business will sue, just like they do every other deadbeat, and the courts will order the US government to pay them. In addition, the US is required by law to pay people under mandated programs like medicade, social security, etc. If it refuses to pay for whatever reason, the courts will order it to pay. I'm not sure if the supreme court can order the US government to increase taxes in order to pay but I wouldn't be surprised if it could. I'm sure it would in Canada Edited July 30, 2011 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Bitsy Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 No, a responsible Congress would have never let the US public debt grow to such proportions so quickly in the first place.....since 1964. True, the party who touted fiscal responsibility, Republicans, did a fine job in escalating our debt. The last five Democratic Presidents, Clinton, Carter, LBJ, JFK, and Truman all reduced the debt, and one has to go back sixty years to find a Democratic President who, facing the Great Depression and World War 2, allowed the debt to increase. On the other hand, the last four Republican Presidents, GW Bush, GHW Bush, Reagan, and Ford all oversaw an increase in the country’s indebtedness. It has been more than thirty years since a Republican President left office (albeit in a scandal) having reduced the National Debt. In the last few decades, somewhere along the way, the Republican Party has become the Party of fiscal irresponsibility. http://www.angrybearblog.com/2007/12/republican-party-and-national-debt.html Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) While that's bad enough it understates things quite a bit. Why? Because the United States has FAR, FAR more people living in poverty than any other western nation. The US is the third most populous country on the planet. Basic math skills are in order here. So while it looks like you're at least better than a few countries in that you spend a certain % of GDP on social welfare programs, that figure is raised, in comparison to most other nations, by the level of poverty in your country. So you admit that your initial claim was wrong concerning all "western nations". And you are most certainly wrong when all levels of spending are included. And yes, Canada is far from perfect in that we take after the U.S. far too much. So your country actually went over the abyss in the 1990's, cut payments to the provinces for "social programs", but the USA can't do the same? Why the different standard? Edited July 30, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
punked Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 You zealots just don't think things through. The United States government has many bills to pay every month. It has a hundred thousand businesses supplying it with goods and services it has to pay. And if it refuses to pay those business will sue, just like they do every other deadbeat, and the courts will order the US government to pay them. In addition, the US is required by law to pay people under mandated programs like medicade, social security, etc. If it refuses to pay for whatever reason, the courts will order it to pay. I'm not sure if the supreme court can order the US government to increase taxes in order to pay but I wouldn't be surprised if it could. He wants Obama to pay China but to stop buying bullets for the troops in Iraq. That has been the point of everyone in this thread and Shady just doesn't care about the troops. He also thinks the government gets all its tax revenue on August 1st like a big pay check even though they really get most tax revenue at the end of the month. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 Time will tell. Time will tell what? That the Americans will decide what is best for them...in their own way? Well...DUH! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
dre Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 (edited) The US is the third most populous country on the planet. Basic math skills are in order here. So you admit that your initial claim was wrong concerning all "western nations". And you are most certainly wrong when all levels of spending are included. So your country actually went over the abyss in the 1990's, cut payments to the provinces for "social programs", but the USA can't do the same? Why the different standard? So your country actually went over the abyss in the 1990's, cut payments to the provinces for "social programs", but the USA can't do the same? Why the different standard? The US CAN do that and it most likely will have to. There will be cuts across the board not just social programs, and eventually there will be big tax hikes. Thats not whats happening here though. In order to reduce the cost of social programs you need to pass amendments to the bills and laws they are derived from. What is actually happening here is a bizzaro political game of chicken where congress is threatening to stop the president from spending money they have ordered him to spend. Edited July 30, 2011 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 The US CAN do that and it most likely will have to. There will be cuts across the board not just social programs, and eventually there will be big tax hikes. There will be cuts across the board not just social programs, and eventually there will be big tax hikes. Great...tell us something we don't already know. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Posted July 30, 2011 True, the party who touted fiscal responsibility, Republicans, did a fine job in escalating our debt. Party politics is fun....but the Republicans also tried to reign in a Republican president back in 80's (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings). The debt escalated anyway, because America wanted guns and butter....still does. 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.