OT: The Price of Plutocracy

Page 4 of 4  


Who said the future should take care of itself? Not me. I simply said that in this forum the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is most ofter brought up as being a prime cause of the DEBT TODAY. Our resident libs harp on it as if it were the main cause or the only cause of our deficits. We've run up $4tril in new debt in the last two years. The total debt is $14tril. Yet the cost of both of those wars as of right now is around $1.3tril. That's 10 years of war. So, clearly the wars are NOT a major source of the problem.
If you want to look into the future, we can do that too. Obama's last budget forecast adding $10tril to the deficit over the next decade. You gonna argue that is due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, both of which are ending, too?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:05:06 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

$15Tril ($14.97) reported as of yesterday.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/u-s-approaches-15-trillion-debt-limit /
Good thing we've had some deficit reduction, eh?

Obama and the Dems surely are.

$10T is assuming the economy takes off at 5-6%. That is NOT going to happen if the debit grows by $10T. At the rate it's going now, the debt will more than double ($15T) in 10 years. There is no reason to think it will do otherwise, given the occupant of the WH.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

They sure ain't helping matters.

Part of it, sure. You read up on things - what's your guess as to how much of the NSA and defense budgets never make it into the official budgets? How much of the defense budget is a response to the two wars making America less safe? How much have our civil liberties been curtailed because of "national security"? There are more costs than just financial ones.
I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to try to make this a red state blue state thing. There's plenty of blame to go around.
The blame game you're playing - that America is playing - is a bi- partisan effort if there ever was one. It is simply a way of distracting people, and it is largely effective.
How's this for a novel idea - instead of playing blame games, fix things. There will be plenty of time afterwards to play the blame game. Pointing fingers and yelling doesn't get things fixed.
R
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Good. Then given the above, you should be a big fan of Reagan's tax cuts. Yet in another post here you deny that those tax cuts produced strong growth. And you constantly harp about RAISING tax rates.


That's already being done. The top 1% of income earners pay 40% of the total income tax burden. You obviously want it ALL. Perhaps you should think about the other end of the equation. As you try to raise their taxes, how much money is going to be pulled away from INVESTMENT, where it creates new businesses and jobs and poured down a rat hole by the govt?

Sure it would. Just like the last one, did right? That one was twice as large. Funny how some never learn.
> It

I can just see the welfare mom buying jeans, toys or household goods made in China as being a real boon to the US economy.

Well, that's exactly what you are advocating, is it not? That somebody is going to get something for nothing via your income redistribution scheme? And historically we know it produces bad results.

Looking at the Japanese experience, we know they racked up huge govt debt engaged in exactly the type of stimulus you propose the USA continue to do. And it didn't work.

Don't be on it.

In addition to being a holocaust apologist, now you're also an apologist for looters.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<stuff snipped>

I suspect that the grocers who take food stamps and the landlords that cash those Section 8 rent checks would disagree that the government is flushing wealth down a hole. The poor are the most likely segment in the economy to take whatever money they get and spend it right away, thus helping to build more grocery stores or help landlords raise enough money to buy more rental homes.
One of the reasons that social programs are so hard to rein in is that the money goes to the poor first, who immediately spend it for rent, food, Ipods and whatever. Both the rich and the poor benefit from Fed "social welfare" payments. The poor get to eat and the not-so-poor get income they wouldn't have gotten otherwise.
When the uber-rich lock up their money in hedge funds or other investments, it tends to drop out of circulation. The same is true of the upper middle class. Only the poor can be expected to spend money as soon as they get it and it *mostly* goes into the hands of those much better off.
While you make great speeches about upward mobility, the reality on the ground is far, far different:
<< The amount of student loans taken out last year crossed the $100-billion mark for the first time, and total loans outstanding will exceed $1 trillion for the first time this year. Americans now owe more on student loans than on credit cards, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Students are borrowing twice what they did a decade ago after adjusting for inflation. Total outstanding debt has doubled in the last five years -- a sharp contrast to consumers reducing what's owed on home loans and credit cards. Full-time undergraduate students borrowed an average $4,963 in 2010, up 63% from a decade earlier after adjusting for inflation. And down the road, of course, those bills will have to be paid.>>
The cost of getting a college education is quickly moving beyond the reach of anyone who doesn't have parents well-off enough to chip in. Worse, still, the crossover into the 1 trillion dollar zone indicates we now have an education bubble that could eventually cause serious problems if the unemployment rates don't fall. Those loans are usually predicated on a student finding work soon after graduation and becoming able to pay them off.
These are some of the effects of the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Raise tuition and the rich just pay it because they can. The poor, however, end up having to abandon their dreams of college and any chance of real upward mobility.
We're seeing wage and benefit stagnation at the low income levels that are only getting worse as more employers like Wal*mart reduce effective income by slashing health care benefits. I watched my benefits get cut a number of times as the bean counters decided too much money was going to employees and not to the CEO's and VPs. Viacom's CEO just got an OUTRAGEOUS paycheck:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/21/viacom-idUSN2128933020110121
<< Jan 21 (Reuters) - Viacom (VIAb.N) Chief Executive Philippe Dauman received total compensation of $84.5 million in 2010 including a one-time stock and option award as part of a new five-year agreement signed in April 2010.>>
That money would create a lot of jobs for a lot of people that need them. People are starting to ask why companies like Viacom don't plow that money back into the company to create new jobs and new markets. The OWS movement is already starting to force some changes. I suspect BoA backed down on its plan to charge debit card fees because they'd put themselves right at the center of the "banks that are too big to fail" controversy. Hopefully, the OWS movement will start to put an end to outrageous corporate theft from those at the top, too.
Kids today aren't getting the breaks I got from just being lucky enough to be born in more prosperous times. Very few people are now able to raise a family on a single income the way many of OUR parents did.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

Ah, but the money had to come from somebody else first, or at least encumber them for the future.
Minus a handling charge.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then your "take" would be as wrong as usual. I'd be interested in seeing you post a link to some actual data that supported your claim because everything I've seen and read so far says you're wrong. The rich are getting richer. The rate that the IRS records show that without any doubt.
I attribute the poor getting poorer to several factors:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:07:12 -0500, HeyBub wrote:

Stupid is as stupid does. Like walking out at lunch, promising to be back, but not returning. Loosing not only that job, but getting rejected by the temp agency for walking out. Time for finding a new temp agency. The problem with the job? It was the last day with no warning because the customer who ordered the work called a half hour before end of the shift the day before and ordered a stop to all work.
These people graduating can't even fill out a job application correctly! They have the reading comprehension level of a third grader, maybe. They have zero reasoning skills because the NEA doesn't want intelligent graduates and neither do those in power.
How about a stupid welfare system that encourages people to stay on welfare and punishes those who try to escape!
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:aec97d2d-6009-47a2-9369-
<stuff snipped>

A society run by a talking Disney dog?
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.