OT - Krauthammer

Page 1 of 2  
I must be getting senile - this is the second time this year I've agreed with Krauthammer :-).
Of course immigration is one of the issues I've always been conservative on. I don't think we need any more people from anywhere - I've seen the population more than double since I started grade school and I don't like the result.
But, since our entire economy is one big Ponzi scheme ...
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/2/2013 12:13 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

+1
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Ditto. Yet, Big Brother continues to encourage procreation via personal deductions for one's offspring from your earnings prior to applying tax due.
What they *should* be doing is the reverse...give deductions - or even credits - for fewer offspring and a higher tax rate for more. The chances of that happening are way less than Dubya saying, "I was wrong".
Oh, wait...were you limiting population increase to that due to border jumping?
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And just as obviously, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's a proven fact that population growth is essential for our economies to survive.
Now, if want to give up your current status (with all its attendant rights and privileges) that the North American economy provides, then maybe your comments may have some merit.
Until that time, you're simply spouting crap.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave wrote:

If you are talking about the economy of more, MORE, *MORE* I suppose you are right. There are other models.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure there are other models. But I have to wonder what percentage of people would be prepared to experience life in one of those 'other models' knowing about this one?
I have to question whether you'd be prepared to switch to one of those other models. Computers, technology, woodworking machinery, even advanced health care could well be gone in one of your 'other models'.
The current model we live in is factually keeping me alive. In some of, perhaps many of those other models you speak about, people with my medical needs would have died off a long time ago. I wouldn't want to live in many of those other models, even if I didn't have my current medical requirements.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave wrote:

I fail to see how your continued living is dependant upon an ever increasing population.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Our current model of living (with it's ever increasing population) comes with many other factors. One of those benefits is our current medical technology. Does that answer your question?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 20:52:14 -0500, Dave wrote:

That's what I said - a Ponzi scheme.
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 18:27:06 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard

The biggest is Social Security. The money I've paid in for 50 years is not mine in an account. It was given away to those older and I'm going to rely on the younger generation. Scary, huh.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote:

Say what you will, it's been working for almost 80 years, aided along by the tobacco industry which has killed who knows how many before they reached retirement age.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 12:27:43 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"

But, like all ponzi schemes, it will eventually collapse from it's own weight and hurt an incredibly large amount of people.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave wrote:

At least they won't be able to say they didn't haveachance to see it coming! I just don't want anyone to act totally surprised, that's all. I can't hear them now, "We (all) knew this was going to happen, and here it is!"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Lew Hodgett" wrote:

"Dave" wrote:

Contrary to all the attempts by the Republican party to dismantle Social Security since it's inception by attempting to discredit S/S using non factual arguments such as S/S is a Ponzi scheme, the program continues to function as designed.
S/S requires tweaking from time to time, the same as any other insurance product, the last major update being 1986.
As long as updates are done in an actuarially sound fashion, S/S will remain a viable insurance product for future generations.
Periodically, some far right hard line Republican group crawls out from under a rock and attempts to try to dismantle S/S.
The application of facts usually provides enough of a good swift kick in the gonads to send them scampering back under their rock for a few more years.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 11:09:13 -0800, Lew Hodgett wrote:

My initial Ponzi comment was not pointed at Social Security, which does seem to be in fair shape with a few tweaks needed to keep it going for the rest of this century.
Rather it was directed at the need for an ever increasing population to keep things going. What would happen to the housing industry, durable goods, automobile, etc. if the population was static? Think about it.
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

with purchasing power, not just people.
So, we don't have to increase the population, we just need to make the people we have more productive.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Larry Blanchard" wrote:

Would agree, especially if we continue to waste the world's resources to feed our life style.
OTOH, if we choose to make modest investments in third world countries, we will develop markets for our products and reduce the demand for basic resources to feed our habits by improving our lifestyle efficiencies.
Simple low cost things like providing clean water and sanitation, mosquito netting to reduce malaria, spotted fever, etc in Africa.
Farming assistance to show that clear cutting the world's jungles to produce heating fuel, provides only short term solutions.
Continuing to flush our topsoil down the Mississippi River by using the present farming methods to produce corn is not a winner.
The only winner in that game is Monsanto.
Recognize that the so-called "War On Drugs" is not working.
Maybe it is better to treat drugs like tobacco and alcohol.
Legalize them and then regulate and tax them.
Wasn't that what Prohibition was all about?
Guess we don't want to learn from our mistakes.
The USA will never again compete as a producer in the low tech world.
If we want to continue to enjoy our lifestyle, we are going to have to make a place at the feed trough for the world's low tech producers so they can afford to buy our high tech products.
As the old saying goes, "What goes around, comes around".
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 02/03/2013 01:16 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Not only that, but all the excess you paid into the SS trust fund was transferred to the general fund and spent - leaving about $3 trillion of IOUs in the trust fund.
And to add to it, the SS and Medicare tax holiday for those younger workers essentially defunded both programs for several years.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave wrote:

I never saw this proved anywhere. I guess whether it's true or not depends on what you mean by "survive". What did you mean by survive? And what did you mean by "our economies", i.e. why the plural? Which ones do you regard as "ours"?
Essential, huh? You think we need more people? Gosh, and some people want to close U.S borders! You think they have it backwards?
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I'd answer yes and no.
Our country was built on immigrants that brought skills, their labor and yes, their buying power to create a demand for goods we make. That makes an economy grow and be strong.
What does not though, is illegal immigrants that come and use all of our facilities and pay nothing towards it. If you want to come and work, OK with me, but if you only want to make babies and get freebies, stay home.
If you come and work and don't pay taxes, you are at least doing a necessary chore and being a consumer. It is when you just take and do not give that upsets people. As for taking American jobs, I doubt that in most cases. I never met anyone that wanted a career picking lettuce in the hot sun. It was not a course in my school.
Add pictures here
<% 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.