Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by antiquity
For a second I actually though you were serious.
No one in America is starving to death.
_____________________________________________
I WILL NOT INSULT YOUR INTELLIGENCE BUT YOUR LACK OF INTELLECT IS FAIR GAME
Remember the axiom of big government bureaucrats: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. When, finally, under the crushing weight of taxes and regulation, it stops moving, subsidize it. Going Postal
For a second I actually though you were serious.
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
Abraham Lincoln
We are getting out of it, and hopefully if Obama is reelected we will get the US moving forward. Of course, Bitch McConnel once said that his priority is to cause Obama to fail. I guess he would love to see the US economy fail.
Really? Bankrupt? Then why is it that the GOPigs keep wanting to lower taxes on the very rich? Do you think that you can get the US treasury in the black by cutting taxes? It makes no sense.
There will always be rich people. Its only that those of us with common sense understand that its a good thing to allow some of the wealth to be shared. By taxing those with billions, we can put money to work instead of allowing it to be invested in the Cayman Islands like a certain presidential candidate is doing.
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
Abraham Lincoln
Yes, really bankrupt. It's happening in Europe and it'll happen here. We've been spending more than we take in for decades. Taxing the rich isn't going to be enough to even cover the budget deficit. The middle class is where the bulk of the income resides and Obama knows it. If you want to have all these programs for the poor and irresponsible, the middle class is going to have to pay for them. A government large enough to give you everything you want, will eventually take everything you have to provide it.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
California is sliding into the ocean!!!!!
Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature.... Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.
- H Keller
Cutting taxes on the wealthy creates jobs and the benefits trickle down to everyone else. See how much better off we are today after 30 years of tax cutting (then borrowing to pay operating expenses) than we were in '82?
This message brought to you by the Republican National Committee.
You make this sound like a bad thing JoJO.California is sliding into the ocean!!!!!
Evidence that people in America are starving to death?
For a second I actually though you were serious.
Hungry? There is a big difference between hungry and starving to death, maybe but there are many safety nets to take care of the hungry if they need and/or use them.
I WILL NOT INSULT YOUR INTELLIGENCE BUT YOUR LACK OF INTELLECT IS FAIR GAME
Remember the axiom of big government bureaucrats: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. When, finally, under the crushing weight of taxes and regulation, it stops moving, subsidize it. Going Postal
In how many of the last 30 years were Republicans able to force taxes down and keep them down without democrat buy-in?
The ambassador died, Obama lied.
Freedom&Liberty (02-11-2012)
Whatm the whole of Europe is bankrupt? But how did this happen, F&L?
You mean the cause of the Eurozone crisis was entitlement programs, and not huge amounts of external debt (private debt far exceeding public debt)? Well, at least austerity measures work.
That genie couldn't be put back in the bottle and I lay blame for that at Reagan's feet for legitimizing the Cut Taxes, Then Borrow for Political Gain With No Thought to the Future. I blame the borrowing on the presidents who signed every spending bill, and most years those were Republicans.
It happened because socialistic liberals in the US government wanted everyone to own their own home. So they pushed banks to make money cheap and easy to lend to irresponsible people who used it to buy overpriced housing. As millions of people defaulted on their debt obligations, a housing glut quickly devalued collateral. The resulting severely depressed housing market, lead to large numbers of unemployed which have significantly reducing government revenues and placed stress on expenditures.
Governments have also committed to tens of trillions in current and future socialistic entitlement obligations. Reduced revenues make these obligations impossible to fund (hint - they never should have been started in the first place), and eventually governments will reach a point where no one will lend to them and government will be unable to meet it's debt/entitlement obligations. This will force the poor and irresponsible to fend for themselves, like they should have had to all along.
European banks helped to globally socialize America's debt and in some cases added to the problem by following America's foolish socialist examples. Apparently, printing massive amounts of money based solely on debt causes economies to collapse. Duh. This is what happens when socialism fails.
Last edited by Freedom&Liberty; 02-12-2012 at 10:46 AM.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
By 2016 we should have the economy pretty much turned around enough to prevent bankruptcy. The funny thing about getting well is that it costs a lot more than was spent getting so sick. If only those who supported such sick policies had looked ahead, but looking ahead isn't their strong suit. It was all about short-term gains for them, right in line with cutting taxes and letting the next generation worry about tomorrow.
Letting the poor fend for themselves doesn't cost government a dime. That's how we get well. Reduce the size and scope of government to affordable, constitutionally mandated levels. What you're advocating is more perpetual illness and that is indicative of the complete lack of foresight which, for decades, has been the strong suit of the left.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
Q: why would socialists want to encourage people to have their own private property?
A: they wouldn't, as this isn't a goal of socialism, but of capitalism.
Q: why, if "the poor" are more likely to default, were these mortgages highly prized assets by 2008?
A: because they’d been put into packages along with ‘prime’ mortgages, creating ‘asset-backed securities’ that theoretically made their low value irrelevant. This made it more profitable for loan/mortgage companies to exploit the poor until the financial sector realised the whole system was now weakened with what became known as ‘toxic assets’. There should have been more regulation from the start, not less. And your solution is to now put our trust in capitalism? What a moron.
No, basic welfare provisions (and overall revenue) have been put into jeopardy because of Bush-era tax cuts. Do you need to see the chart again? Yeah you do:
Oh, because the “poor and irresponsible” had an equal shot with everyone else in your eyes. The rich are rich because they deserve it, and who cares if that’s not true…
That isn’t what caused the Eurozone crisis, and the only European country to be doing well out of it (Germany) is one you’d consider to be pretty socialist, what with their good working laws and extensive welfare programmes. I suppose that means your whole worldview is wrong, but hey.
Check out the Preamble to the Constitution. The levels mandated are decided by our representatives in congress. Per Article I, that's their job.
Government controlled how banks lent money. That's not capitalism. Socialism wants to distribute the ownership of property among the community.
In a capitalistic environment banks would have operated independent of government. They never would have made toxic loans. Instead, our socialistic government demanded that banks distribute loans to people who didn't even begin to meet normal minimum loan requirements. Government had to provide safety nets like deregulation that allowed banks to align with insurance companies, and use government sponsored entities like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as a dumping ground for loans and risk. There's nothing capitalistic about any of this.Q: why, if "the poor" are more likely to default, were these mortgages highly prized assets by 2008?
A: because they’d been put into packages along with ‘prime’ mortgages, creating ‘asset-backed securities’ that theoretically made their low value irrelevant. This made it more profitable for loan/mortgage companies to exploit the poor until the financial sector realised the whole system was now weakened with what became known as ‘toxic assets’. There should have been more regulation from the start, not less. And your solution is to now put our trust in capitalism? What a moron.
Our debt can just as easily be attributed to social security and medicare. That chart is just politically biased cherry picking.No, basic welfare provisions (and overall revenue) have been put into jeopardy because of Bush-era tax cuts. Do you need to see the chart again? Yeah you do:
I have no obligation to feed, shelter or clothe people I don't even know. Neither does government. Feel free to bring down the rich, but do it honestly by profiting from the sale of your product or service.Oh, because the “poor and irresponsible” had an equal shot with everyone else in your eyes. The rich are rich because they deserve it, and who cares if that’s not true…
Hardly.That isn’t what caused the Eurozone crisis, and the only European country to be doing well out of it (Germany) is one you’d consider to be pretty socialist, what with their good working laws and extensive welfare programmes. I suppose that means your whole worldview is wrong, but hey.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15748696
As Germany bails out the rest of the union, it's economy will stumble. It's already begun -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15748696
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
Article 1:Section 8 defines the only mandates congress has. All others are made up nonsense.
When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared with one man? [Henry David Thoreau]
Art I, Sec 8 includes the Taxing and Spending, Interstate Commerce, and Necessary and Proper Clause. That covers everything that might be troubling you that is not otherwise spelled out.
If you think there might be laws on the books that aren't constitutional or that the executive branch of government has overstepped its authority, take your argument to court. We're satisfied that our government is operating properly (now) and the absence of successful court challenges validates that position.
Last edited by Chachma v'Oz; 02-12-2012 at 05:08 PM.
Figures that you wouldn't blame the democrats who wrote those bills. And once TFO's imperial presidency takes hold, it will never go away either. Amazing how shortsighted everyone is about this. What will you do when a future Republican president simply demands that Planned Parenthood, for example, not be allowed to perform more than 100 abortions per year? Somehow I don't think we'd see a lot of "well, it's the law".
The ambassador died, Obama lied.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks