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?
On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 08:05:06 -0700 (PDT), " email@example.com"
$15Tril ($14.97) reported as of yesterday.
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.
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.
Good. Then given the above, you should be a big fan of Reagan's tax
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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:
<< 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
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.
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:
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!
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.