The 'American Dream'?

[Snake]

You put your test in the wrong section. It belongs here. http://www.ninjette.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14

Drink some coffee and get back to work.

[ally99]

Originally Posted by "A"

US Government no longer belong to its people, it's been controlled by corporations for a long time.

+1 ...and those same corporations run by the elite happen to control our media, so when you're getting your "facts" from the evening news, what you're really getting is information spoon fed to you. You won't hear anything you're not "supposed" to hear when relying on mainstream media for your information.
The saying, "money makes the word go around" is sadly more literal than not.

[drowe531]

Thank you Alex for pointing out that just about any plans or actions taken by the current government, we will not see the effects until a few years down the road. The effects we are suffering from right now were rooted and established a long time ago. The economy is not something that any president can wave a magic wand and fix, it takes years to truly see the effects of legislation put into place.

[bdavison]

Originally Posted by Alex

First - there is no big dial at the white house (or in congress, or within the fed reserve, or any other large entity with an effect on the economy), where someone points the dial at good economy or bad economy. There are a couple levers that each of them have, but each and every one of them has consequences to adjusting in any direction.

Huh? In the very same paragraph, you say they dont have a dial...and then you say they have levers with consequences.

Levers, Dials, Switches...who cares. The point is, they HAVE, and DO make changes to our economy good or bad.

Anybody who believes that any elected (or unelected) official is excited about presiding over a crappy economy is a fool. Leaders during bad economic times have short tenures. Leaders during strong economic times have a chance at longer tenures. It's just the way things work. The disconnect is when the problems of today that took a long period to come to pass, are landed at the feet of the poor sap(s) now charged with cleaning up the mess.

Cleaning up the mess? Obama has help CREATE the mess, he's not trying to clean up anything. He's a liar and a crook. What should we have expected from a typical chicago politician. His administration's policies have cost the american taxpayer trillions of dollars, and he still not satisfied. He and his buddies want to spend more. He really doesnt care about a crappy economy, his goal wasnt to make us financially stable, it was to cram progressive and socialist ideology down our throats.

We've got a huge problem when people start to have a pity party for their elected officials. I have no sympathy for any politician with regards to inherited problems. They wanted that position, they asked for it. So when they get elected, I fully expect them to do their damn job, and if they cant handle it. GET OUT, and let someone that can do it.

The monetary policy of the past 10+ years (not the 2 years that those with little insight or perspective point to) kept the prime interest rates *too low* to keep consumer spending up and support a gradually weakening economy. Interest rates haven't been high in many, many years, and the key rate hovered close to nothing for a very long time. This propped up cheap loans, encouraged consumers to continually borrow against their paper profits in home values that were never going to be sustainable.

You mention the CRA later in your post...so we will get back to this.

But raising the rates has its own troubles, adding to the money supply has its own troubles, working to lower the trade gap has its own troubles, working with the tax rates has its own troubles, supporting unemployment vs tax incentives for hiring has its own troubles. None of this is easy. There is no straightforward answer, and anyone who is trying to sell you one is taking you for a fool.

I never said it was easy, but when we clearly have tried one direction, and it continues to fail miserably. Its time to try something else.
What we have right now, is clearly failed economic policy...and instead of doing a 180, and making changes, they just run head first into it as fast as they can.
Time and time again, we've seen that overtaxation of the people, with overspending, and entitlement = failed economy. It failed during Carter, It failed during Clinton, and its failing now. What does it take to get the point across that this type of economic plan simply does not work. Will it take a complete economic crash to wake up everyone?

(1) Sure, but seeing how the previous administration managed to turn a surplus into the largest deficit the US had ever seen in only two terms, clearly there are no winners here. In a bad economy, it's hard to make ends meet, and that includes government.

Oh boy, here we go again. Another person that wants to blame Bush. Here's the thing. During Bush's administration, we actually had a SURPLUS. To the point where they started sending out extra refund checks to the american public.
It wasnt until the very END of Bush's administration, when poor administration by the banking industry caused economic failure in the housing market(we will get to the CRA in a minute regarding this), and lousy CEO's who ran their companies into the ground start asking for the government to bail them out of the mess they got themselves into.

The Democrats controlled Congress. They rejected Bush’s bailout plan. When the House couldn’t pass a bailout plan, Nancy Pelosi blamed Republicans even though 95 Democrats rejected their own plan.

The only thing I can fault Bush for, is that he folded, and signed off on Nancy Pelosi's bailout plan. He should have stuck to his guns, and let those fatcat CEO's watch as the bank locked their doors and auctioned off their assets.

(2) Really? Who did? The creation of it was a problem? The lack of tying it to longer lifetimes? The lack of tying it GDP or any other benchmark? The lack of truly setting money aside rather than IOU's of sorts for decades? This is a generational problem that will take many years to sort out.

Its not a generational problem, its a entitlement problem. When Roosevelt put this thing into action as part of his "New Deal", he messed up. The government cannot take care of you. Instead of hosing the american public by telling them all to sit back and let uncle sam handle your old age with Social Security, they should have launched a campaign to teach the american public how to invest, and save for retirement, and offer options for doing so.

Then because of the Social Security Trust Fund (rolling eyes)...the government took money from social security and invested it into non-marketable securities (in other words...they took money from social security, and gave it to themselves) and then stuck the IOU in the social security box. Then they told everyone "Its ok, the IOU's are backed by the US government". Ha..With what? They dont have anything to back it with. Its a big lie. Shift some paper around, cook the books, and keep telling everyone its all good.

Just to make sure they covered their arses on it, the Supreme Court said you dont have a right to social security. So they just dont have to give you squat, so what if your hard earned money was taken out of your check for social security.

The whole thing is nothing more than theft by the government from the American public.

Of all the money I've had stolen from me by Social Security, had I been allowed to invest that money myself...even in a simple savings acct...would have given me FAR more return, than social security ever will. Not to mention...whats to say Ill even get social security. It might fail, they might deny it to me. Who knows.

(3) Really? What exactly has been more screwed up in Medicaid now than it ever has been before? Waste is down, bureaucracy is down, but costs continue to go up.

Fraud for one. Medicade is so infested with fraud, and that is what is increasing costs.

(4) Healthcare. This is the point where anyone with a brain can be distinguished from one instead with unwavering ideological blinders. The Healthcare system continues to get more expensive, continues to become harder for those other than the wealthy to find affordable care, and the increases in cost of services continue to go up at double-digit percentages for year after year (for 15+ years now). Everyone sees how much of the government spending is allocated for this. Everyone sees how much their own premiums are going up for this. Yet any perceived change in the status quo to deal with the cost issue is seen as an attack on what suddenly people are so happy with. But most importantly, as almost *none* of the reforms have come to pass as of June 2011, blaming anything in the economy to the attempted healthcare reform is patently ludicrous. If anything, the failure to do something sooner is causing a drag on investment. The attacks on "Obama-Care" are another way to stir up anger against some bogeyman that doesn't exist, it has the same intellectual accuracy as the fight over non-existent death panels.

Surely, I'd agree. Healthcare does need some changes. But FORCING people into yet another socialist entitlement program is not the answer.
We need healthcare reform, not healthcare dictatorship. I do not want, nor need anyone dictating to me how I should handle my healthcare options. Im absolutely hair-pulling fed up with being forced to have my hard earned money stolen from me and handed off to government programs that contradict both my personal preference, and religious beliefs.

(5) This is the biggest pile of crap. It is discredited over and over again, yet the same factually-challenged biased blogs and portions of the media repeat it as if saying anything often enough makes it true. Every repub's favorite punching bag is the Community Reinvestment Act, as it allows them to bring up the race card and separate their political base from the poor evil "other folks" who are messing up the system by being granted credit they don't deserve. It's such a great political ploy, that any actual research to find out whether the Act truly did make for more or less risky loans, or whether banks became truly more or less profitable while meeting CRA obligations, is hidden away and ignored. Which makes sense, as the truth gets in the way of a great soundbite.

Please enlighten us, since you apparently have facts that show that the housing crash was the result of some factor other than garbage loans to people with either no intention, or no means of paying them back.

Oh, and it has nothing to do with race. Sub-prime and ARM mortgages went every different kind of race. But the fact that these loans went to people that did not deserve them is correct. White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc etc etc...doesnt matter. If you suck at paying your bills and dont have a job, you shouldnt be able to get a $200,000 loan from the bank that you cant afford.

And if you dont think that banking regulations from the government had anything to do with them being allowed to, you are kidding yourself.

The CRA was just one of many tragic regulations that had an impact on it.

Ranting about how bad things are is one thing. It's annoying and tiresome, but it's intellectually supportable. When assigning blame for the true causes of whatever one is ranting about, if every answer is "we need to vote 'dem bums out, because my bums knows how to fix it", we are one step closer to a country of ignorant fools. At the very least, on this particular website on this particular part of the internet, if one is to go on a political rant, at least reference a particular piece of legislation, a policy, a vote, a "anything" that actually happened so there's something to actually talk about rather than the same useless dreck that it repeated over and over again from less than credible sources.

Ok, ask and you shall recieve.

Resolution Trust Corporation Refinancing, Restructuring, and Improvement Act of 1991 - Allowed the FDIC to borrow from the Treasury to take care of failing banks. Banks that were failing from giving out shoddy loans.

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 - Allowed HUD to force Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac to securitize garbage loans.

Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 - Profitable banks looking to expand were now allowed to....provided they had excellent CRA ratings. Meaning they had to take on high risk CRA loans, before they could expand.
Some banks held off, Some banks didnt. Take Smith Barney for example.

Community organizers like Obama spent time riling up the low income/no income folks telling them all they deserved a mansion. And then because of CRA, they could get one. If the bank refused, the community organizers like Obama filed lawsuit after lawsuit claiming violation of the CRA. It was nothing more than extortion of the banking industry by organized crime syndicates like ACORN.

CRA was just the kindling for the fire, forcing banks to lend money to "low income" customers. It was the hundreds of legislation bills, securitizing of mortgages, and extortion by community organizers like Obama that piled all the wood on top.

All it took was for house prices to dip just a little bit, and the fire was lit.

[Alex]

You're deluded to the core. I apologize for continuing a useless debate.

["A"]

If Obama tries to get Corporate America out of US Government like he said he would during his campaign back in 2008, he 'will' get assassinated... like Abe, Bobby and John.

Livin'up the dream America.

[ally99]

The left/right paradigm does just what it was created to do...it divides us so distinctly that once one is inside that "box", it is very unlikely that he/she will ever come out of it, for better or worse.
Do your own research. Look outside of mainstream media sources to really figure out what's going on and who is REALLY to blame.

[coondog]

We've had a "Global" economy now for 20 years, Japan went into the dumps first, then Russia as it fell apart, then Europe as it had to unite to survive, now us. It will be Chinas' turn when they think they can call in all their markers. Besides all this, volunteer at home for a suicide hotline, or your unemployed be taken care of by a charity group as you work for them in Central or South America. Perspective. Reality.
Watch "Grapes of Wrath" with Henry Fonda as no one reads real anymore.
That was our last turn before now.

["A"]

Meanwhile, the US prison population grows nearly twice as fast as birthrate.. most if not all of them get free health care... probably better service than however much I pay for my crappy health insurance coverage.

In PA, it cost the state average approx. $50,000-65,000 a year to keep a prisoner incarcerated, that's about the cost of sending a child to private school from 1st through 10th grade.

[CThunder-blue]

As far as the debate goes, I'm not going to step into that puddle of poop. I will lay out some facts for people. Real facts that aren't imagined.

The pentagon, under obama's direction (Defense Secretary Gates), canceled the remaining contract from Lockheed Martin for 7 remaining F-22 Raptor Stealth fighters. This is in part to shift to a save the government any more money spent and also to shift to a multi-role fighter plane, the F-35. This cancellation cost Lockheed Martin, company wide, to lose ~6,000 directly employed workers. Everyone from top execs in the F-22 program, down to the facilities clean up crew got axed or, if they were lucky enough, relocated to another job. The trickle effect, such as parts not manufactured by LM like the engines by Pratt & Whitney, caused another loss of approximately 4,000 jobs. Everyone from raw materials, transportion, engineering, and manufacturing of subcontractors lost jobs, some closing down businesses.

This thrust ~10,000 unemployed skilled and white collar workers into the unemployment list. These people had families and mortgages. I don't know if anyone defaulted in their mortgages from this event, but I'm guessing there were a few.

Not related to the Raptor cancellation, LM Space Systems has lost 3,000 additional jobs within the last 2 years. They also offered voluntary separation packages to execs to help keep the ones with lower income to stay working. This year, they are expecting to lose 1,200 jobs. Military funding has gone down the tubes.

I'm not saying we should keep building war machines/peace keepers. But in a time when the economy was in a severe dive, the obama military administration lead by gates had and continues to have, a very short sighted view of what happens when military spending decreases dramatically.

[bdavison]

A government that is big enough to give you everything you need, is also big enough to take everything you have.

There is no left or right wing, there are no democrats and republicans....there is only UP, and DOWN. And those that would give up their freedoms for security are going down with neither.

[shiroganeshinobi]

To a complex question here is a very simple answer I've found.

Excuse the crazy site but thevideo is quite valid.

[LazinCajun]

!

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

To a complex question here is a very simple answer I've found.

Excuse the crazy site but thevideo is quite valid.

[sarcasm font]But trickle down economics will take care of the middle class![/sarcasm font]

In all seriousness, while I don't disagree that what he says in the video is *a* huge problem with our current econ, it's such a ridiculously complex subject that I'm not sure it can even be explained in a 5 hour video, much less a 2 minute. I feel like I have to take it with a big grain of salt. Still, interesting video, well worth watching for non-experts like myself.

[zartan]

Sorry, but bush was great compared to the complete idiot we have now. Whats it gonna take to snap the obama zombies back into reality? I think we are going to have to slap the crap out of them to get them to take the fingers out of their ears first.

Ok in the political threads I ain't gotta be nice. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.This has been YEARS in the making, Part of fiasco started way back at the end Clinton Admin when they started deregulating mortgages. Followed by years of collective greed On EVERYONE's part. Your's, Mine, Ours... Kill your television and go live your life. Go ride your Ninja and be happy that you can. Remember to share with someone who has less than you do. If we all don't take responsiblilty for what is happening or has happened then we have learnt nothing. Maybe I can blame Bush or Obama or Reagan for the fact I didn't get my vacumming done this week. Damn them!! Damn them all!!
Damn one person Ruining everything... damn it.

[zartan]

Originally Posted by ally99

The left/right paradigm does just what it was created to do...it divides us so distinctly that once one is inside that "box", it is very unlikely that he/she will ever come out of it, for better or worse.
Do your own research. Look outside of mainstream media sources to really figure out what's going on and who is REALLY to blame.

[almost40]

Um, doesnt Congress control the purse strings??
The president can only veto a budget. As Bush threatened many times in 07-08

Control of Congress and the budget.
Democrats 2006-last election

Republicans 1995-2005

Interesting how the debt explodes in 2008

And heres the administrations projections and the CBO's.

Were all in big trouble if we dont get a handle on things.

This was after the election

[almost40]

This is the latest

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by LazinCajun

!

[sarcasm font]But trickle down economics will take care of the middle class![/sarcasm font]

In all seriousness, while I don't disagree that what he says in the video is *a* huge problem with our current econ, it's such a ridiculously complex subject that I'm not sure it can even be explained in a 5 hour video, much less a 2 minute. I feel like I have to take it with a big grain of salt. Still, interesting video, well worth watching for non-experts like myself.

It's a good generalization of the problem. Basically, Wall Street heavily influences government with lobbying in their favor. If you want to delve a little deeper about the middle class debacle, Elizabeth Warren(Bless her soul) describes the ending of the Middle class here and quoted in this article. What's disturbing is that the public has been propagandized by the mainstream media to the point that we don't get the whole picture, which causes us to fight amongst ourselves for whatever scraps are left.

I will say that I am disappointed in Obama because he really had the chance to really shake things up. Instead he got pulled into intellectual capture like every other politician, as a result, Wall Street is still relatively unchanged and in control.

Remember, Bush fought two wars and introduced Medicare-D without devising a way to pay for it. He also introduced TARP with did work(kinda) which Obama got credited for. Obama had to do more stimulus to make sure we dont fall into a depression.

[almost40]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

What's disturbing is that the public has been propagandized by the mainstream media to the point that we don't get the whole picture

Obama had to do more stimulus to make sure we dont fall into a depression.

Did we get propagandized ourself???

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by almost40

Did we get propagandized ourself???

I know I was at one point, then I started reading more from the other side and their presentation was more objective.

Case in point vs counterpoint. Clearly, a conservative vs liberal viewpoint, so neither one is valid right?

So let's check out some more objective nonpartisan stuff. Here are some nice looking charts about the Bush Tax cuts. Here's a good survey on what we think about our taxes. Here's one talking about how banks are fine now that we saved them.

The dots should be connecting themselves right now. If you cant be bothered to research then how about some videos? It's more enjoyable to watch videos like IOUSA, Inside job, or Frontline on PBS.

[bdavison]

There are two steps. One...cut taxes, so that the people keep more of their money, and businesses can florish with out all the red tape. Two...stop spending money you dont have.

Its a very simple process. I dont know why people cant figure this out.


The problem with the bush years was that they only got one part of it right...the tax cuts. But they continued to spend.

Go back and look at Reagan...he managed to do both.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by bdavison

Go back and look at Reagan...he managed to do both.

Laughable.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news...axes/index.htm

http://www.presidentreagan.info/reagan_budgets.cfm

He initially cut taxes, and spoke about reducing budgets, yet actual budgets went up every year, and he left office with a deficit that was $2T higher than when he went in. Not to mention that there were many "revenue enhancers" (code for new/raised taxes when people don't want to say taxes) toward the end of his presidency as it was increasingly obvious that there was a gap that was growing much higher than he (and his policy advisors) had hoped.

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by bdavison

Its a very simple process. I dont know why people cant figure this out.

Go back and look at Reagan...he managed to do both.

Actually, Regan did raise taxes and so did HW Bush in his later term. The surplus we saw during Clinton years were partial to his tax hike.

What's simple is tax breaks are not free. They cost the government money to do because they lose revenue since they collect less. So the answer is to cut spending to make up the difference right? Well, since we couldnt cut defense for the two wars, I guess we're suppose to cut spending to social programs right or education? Right?

So the rich is suppose to start hiring since they got more money right? Are these the same companies who wanted to move job overseas to rake in the profits?

You really have to see the viewpoints of both sides to begin to see the bigger picture of what's wrong. I like to think Democrats are the lesser of two evils but in reality the are just as guilty as their Republican counterparts. A good example is when Brooksley Born tried to get the derivative markets regulated. Robert Rubin and Larry Summers cock blocked her and bullied her our of public service. The same could be said for Elizabeth Warren now.

The simplest answer goes back to that 2 minute video and it started with Reaganomics.

[CC Cowboy]

I miss George (Washington).

[Alex]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

I miss George (Washington).

[almost40]

He would be in jail today. You cant cut down a tree the envirowackoo's would go nuts. Hes causing global warming.

[Alex]

Don't worry, it was in a "sustainable forest" cherry tree orchard, and the tree was heavily medicated ahead of time to make sure it couldn't feel any pain.

[CC Cowboy]

That story was actually changed over the years (political correctness). Georgie boy actually plucked a cherry from a bush. The guy sleep everywhere on the east coast (according to the placks on numerous homes).

[almost40]

Wake up people. The top 6 states that are going broke are all controled and have been controled by liberals for years. They are all teatering or on the brink of going bankrupt.
New York, Cali, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Mass. All Liberal controled at the state level. ALL BROKE.

The democrat party has been hijacked by the socialist/marxists.
The republican party has been taken over by the corprate big wigs.

Im a conservative. Im all for taking back the republican party and restoring fiscal sanity.
We can not, repeat CAN NOT continue on this path. WE MUST CUT SPENDING. The liberals will never do that, EVER. They would have no voting base.
Go ahead and bash Reagan if it makes you feel better. He and Bush Sr presided over the largest economic expansion in US history. That expansion lasted for over 2 decades.
There are those who hated Clinton. I never had a problem with him. (even the monica thing) He and the republican controled house did a bang up job of keeping things going economicaly. Things went swimingly until GW turned into quasi liberal (2nd term) and the marxist socialist took over the democrat party and off the cliff we go.
Socialism does not work. Please point to a socialist/marxist mecca in the world. THERE ISNT ONE. We need to get back to the prinicipals that made this country great. It wasnt rasing taxes, government spending and or government regulations. IT WAS INDIVIDUALISM. People taking personal responsability for themself and there future. Government spending wont make this country great again.

The individual will.

Another thought. Why would you need to Fundamentaly change something that isnt broken.

My 250 runs great. Think ill fundamentaly change it.
How about fundamentaly changing your good health.
Think ill fundamentaly change electricity. Thats gota be good right?

BTW Did anyone else notice that there was not an American flag behing Obama last night?? Wonder which marxist decided not to put a flag behind the president. Dont tell me it was an oversight. Thats BS. Someone decided not to put a flag up for that speach.

[bdavison]

I guess we're suppose to cut spending to social programs right or education?

Yes.


Social program spending needs far more discipline than it is recieving now. We need more accountability in items that our government uses our money for. There are tons of these social programs that pass out BILLIONS of taxpayer funds, with little to no accountability, no discipline, and no recovery method for fradulent or failed programs.

And that includes the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, National Science Foundation, Welfare, HUD, Social Security, Medicade, etc etc etc.

Each of these has spent literally BILLIONS of dollars on projects that have never done ONE SINGLE thing. Just sat idle.

Im all for us having assistance programs, BUT...there must be accountability. I want to see results, and if they dont perform...the funding should be cut.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by almost40

Wake up people. The top 6 states that are going broke are all controled and have been controled by liberals for years. They are all teatering or on the brink of going bankrupt.
New York, Cali, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Mass. All Liberal controled at the state level. ALL BROKE.

You realize that it's been internet rules for 15 years that when anyone uses "wake up people!" in any political rant, they automatically lose and have to buy drinks for the rest of the board?

Originally Posted by almost40

Im a conservative. Im all for taking back the republican party and restoring fiscal sanity.

Good luck with that. There's always a wide gulf between ideology and results, and that is displayed quite well by any of the "conservative republican" administrations going back as far as one would like to research. It's not hard to point fingers at groups in either major party and come up with unending examples of fiscal missteps.

Originally Posted by almost40

WE MUST CUT SPENDING. The liberals will never do that, EVER.

It's OK, nobody ever does it. But some are more eager to talk about all of the spending cuts that they will make happen (without dealing with any of the areas that truly affect deficits in any meaningful way), and will take credit for cuts by defining them as smaller increases that were initially budgeted for future years. The transparency is non-existent; skepticism of all is warranted.

Originally Posted by almost40

Go ahead and bash Reagan if it makes you feel better. He and Bush Sr presided over the largest economic expansion in US history. That expansion lasted for over 2 decades.

Nobody is bashing Reagan. The people that are easy (and fun) to bash are those who continue to misunderstand what Reagan actually did, compared to what is now being falsely portrayed as what he did. In other words, the world's not what it used to be, and for that matter, it never was. Reagan was ultimately a pretty pragmatic guy who made many more right calls than wrong calls, and deserves credit as such. The problem is the complete misstatement in today's world about "if we only did what Reagan did, all would be well". And then mistaking his ideology for what was actually done throughout (lowered taxes on wealthy, eventually raised taxes on everyone else + corporations, attempted to lower spending but ultimately raised spending significantly in all but 1 year, running large deficits that ended up as large as ever had been seen by the end of his 2nd term). "Reaganism" didn't work for Reagan. Let alone any of the pretenders or the clueless soundbite repeaters of today's political world.

Originally Posted by almost40

Socialism does not work. Please point to a socialist/marxist mecca in the world. THERE ISNT ONE.

The current administration is as far from socialism/marxism as any administration over the past 40 years. Heck, they are further right than Nixon on any host of issues, from national defense, to healthcare, to welfare. The abject fear that we are now under a socialist/marxist/communist administration that is hell-bent on removing individual rights and free will, well, that's paranoia run amok. It has no basis whatsoever, and examples to affronts to personal freedom are even easier to point out in the prior administration.

Originally Posted by almost40

BTW Did anyone else notice that there was not an American flag behing Obama last night?? Wonder which marxist decided not to put a flag behind the president. Dont tell me it was an oversight. Thats BS. Someone decided not to put a flag up for that speach.

Right - because he is secretly trying to tie us up with the World Bank and usurp American individuality with the illuminati and the tri-lateral commission. I never get the point of these rants, as they are so far from any semblance of logic or reason, that they are impossible to do anything other than point and laugh. They are not even wrong.

Originally Posted by bdavison

Social program spending needs far more discipline than it is recieving now. We need more accountability in items that our government uses our money for. There are tons of these social programs that pass out BILLIONS of taxpayer funds, with little to no accountability, no discipline, and no recovery method for fradulent or failed programs.

There's something to this, and there's nothing wrong with continuing to demand accountability and efficiency in how money is spent. But the reality is that it's been a rallying cry for 50+ years to just come to Washington and "cut waste", and billions of dollars can be found. Of course there are always those fun outliers that can be found (bridge to nowhere, $1000 hammers, military contracting, any number of pork barrel projects), but all of that added up together and multiplied by 10 still doesn't address the real problem. Being fierce around the edges and ignoring the big number items is intellectually misleading.

Originally Posted by bdavison

Im all for us having assistance programs, BUT...there must be accountability. I want to see results, and if they dont perform...the funding should be cut.

This also has validity, but the complexity is that metrics need to be developed to actually measure results. Not metrics for the sake of metrics. Otherwise everything goes down the path of "No Child Left Behind" and similar programs / problems, where chasing the disconnected metrics ends up in more waste, poorer results, and ultimately a failed effort, even though it was ostensibly tied to results. Anyone who compares "No Child Left Behind" with this administration's "Race to the Top" can very easily see that the requirements for improvement, metrics for success, and likelihood of success, are a heck of alot more likely to work better this time. And in doing so, it left more individuality up to the states, had more flexibility on how to meet the metrics for success, and successfully challenged some of the long-standing roadblocks in education (including recalcitrant unions) more than ever would have been thought possible by those of any political ideology.

[shiroganeshinobi]

What deficit arguments are really about on the Hill.

If you've read or watched any of the material I've linked so far I applaud you for open-mindedness and I hope you've learned a little more about the background noise. Great links Alex btw.

[LazinCajun]

Originally Posted by bdavison

And that includes the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, National Science Foundation, Welfare, HUD, Social Security, Medicade, etc etc etc.

Each of these has spent literally BILLIONS of dollars on projects that have never done ONE SINGLE thing. Just sat idle.

Bryan, I keep trying to stay out of these threads, but ridiculous statements like this keep drawing me back in. Stop it. I'm not going to try to make an argument about social security, welfare, or medicade because those are really ideological things.

However, let's look at the budget of NASA for a moment. It takes a lot of money to support their research, launching shuttles, etc. etc. etc. yes?

NASA's FULL budget last year is less than what the military spent on *air conditioning*. source Science funding is a drop in the bucket when looking at national spending. This is from a couple years ago, but things haven't changed much. http://scienceblogs.com/voteforscien...ze_under_m.php These are not the areas that need to be addressed to make significant changes in the budget.

I don't know if you've noticed, but the USA is falling way behind on the education front. Cutting education funding is quite possibly the worst decision possible. If we don't develop the bright minds in this country, we will never be able to compete in the global market, particularly as our economy continues to shift away from manufacturing.

Edited to add:

Originally Posted by Alex

In other words, the world's not what it used to be, and for that matter, it never was.

This is hilarious, I'm stealing this turn of phrase.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by LazinCajun

This is hilarious, I'm stealing this turn of phrase.

Thx, but I can only take partial credit for paraphrasing. It's from Will Rogers, who said it even more succinctly: "Things ain't what they used to be and never were."

[almost40]

Originally Posted by Alex

It's OK, nobody ever does it. But some are more eager to talk about all of the spending cuts that they will make happen (without dealing with any of the areas that truly affect deficits in any meaningful way), and will take credit for cuts by defining them as smaller increases that were initially budgeted for future years. The transparency is non-existent; skepticism of all is warranted.

Isnt this whats happening right now?? Under this administration.

Originally Posted by Alex

Nobody is bashing Reagan. The people that are easy (and fun) to bash are those who continue to misunderstand what Reagan actually did, compared to what is now being falsely portrayed as what he did. In other words, the world's not what it used to be, and for that matter, it never was. Reagan was ultimately a pretty pragmatic guy who made many more right calls than wrong calls, and deserves credit as such. The problem is the complete misstatement in today's world about "if we only did what Reagan did, all would be well". And then mistaking his ideology for what was actually done throughout (lowered taxes on wealthy, eventually raised taxes on everyone else + corporations, attempted to lower spending but ultimately raised spending significantly in all but 1 year, running large deficits that ended up as large as ever had been seen by the end of his 2nd term). "Reaganism" didn't work for Reagan. Let alone any of the pretenders or the clueless soundbite repeaters of today's political world.

Regan had to deal with a democrat Congress and senate who hated what he was doing. He had to compromise, thats politics. I think others here are trying to argue his philosophy, not what really happened.
As far as the debt goes.
As large as we ever seen?? As a percentage of GDP I beg to differ on this point. The current administration has blown them all away. BY FAR. (even GW at over 80% of GDP)

Originally Posted by Alex

running large deficits that ended up as large as ever had been seen by the end of his 2nd term).

True.........
That is if you completely ignore the Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower administrations. All higher than Regan...... Roosevelt's deficit was the largest as a pecentage of GDP EVER at over 115%......(Regans was 53%) Roosevelt still holds the current record until the Obama administration gives us a budget.

BTW, careful Alex, your repeating a soundbite yourself.
Check your facts, they are out there.

Originally Posted by Alex

The current administration is as far from socialism/marxism as any administration over the past 40 years. Heck, they are further right than Nixon on any host of issues, from national defense, to healthcare, to welfare. The abject fear that we are now under a socialist/marxist/communist administration that is hell-bent on removing individual rights and free will, well, that's paranoia run amok. It has no basis whatsoever, and examples to affronts to personal freedom are even easier to point out in the prior administration.

Another soundbite.............. from the left no less.

LOL, NIXON thats the example of a right winger??
I dont remember the Nixon administration trying to pass or passing socialized medicine without reading the bill no less. Remember Nancy saying "you have to pass it to see whats in it" Were still learning what was in the bill.
Nixons military budget was over 9% of GDP. Obama administration 5%, and projected to shrink. As far as welfare goes DONT even get me started lol. Are we talking state and federal spending?? The above statement about welfare is easy to make about ANY administration. Lets quantify here a little.

Originally Posted by Alex

Right - because he is secretly trying to tie us up with the World Bank and usurp American individuality with the illuminati and the tri-lateral commission. I never get the point of these rants, as they are so far from any semblance of logic or reason, that they are impossible to do anything other than point and laugh. They are not even wrong.

Im not Ranting about the the world bank. I think that BS is hillarious. Im just saying someone over there at the Whitehouse INTENTIONALLY left the flag out of the picture. Point to another speach in the east room, or any room in the White House that didnt have a flag behing the president. This one or any other administration.

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by almost40

Stuff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Everyone can be guilty of this, the question is do you look at the whole picture or stay locked in your viewpoint and refuse to consider the other?

[almost40]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Everyone can be guilty of this, the question is do you look at the whole picture or stay locked in your viewpoint and refuse to consider the other?

Which statement are we talking about??


Drsketch

Unemployed?
NO, I work when I want. (driving my Freightliner) Collect rent checks, and in general, live off of compounding interest.

Why do you ask?? Are you unemployed??

[Xoulrath]

Originally Posted by almost40

NO, I work when I want. (driving my Freightliner) Collect rent checks, and in general, live off of compounding interest.

Nice!

[rockNroll]

This thread has moved beyond my skill level

[bdavison]

Originally Posted by LazinCajun

However, let's look at the budget of NASA for a moment... These are not the areas that need to be addressed to make significant changes in the budget.

Dont mistake that NASA is the only thing getting funding. NASA is not the only thing involved in scientific funding with our tax dollars. NASA is not the problem. Its the fly-by-night programs with little to no real scientific value that Im talking about. And there are many of them.

I don't know if you've noticed, but the USA is falling way behind on the education front. Cutting education funding is quite possibly the worst decision possible. If we don't develop the bright minds in this country, we will never be able to compete in the global market, particularly as our economy continues to shift away from manufacturing.

Yes, our education is failing. Mainly because we dump money into teachers and education programs that fail to produce real education. No matter how much money you throw at a teacher, if they suck at teaching..they will always suck at teaching.

Whenever anyone says cut funding...many people assume that means cutting everything. Then they start screaming about how the kids will be affected, and the unions, and the old folks....etc.etc.etc. What you arent understanding is that this is not a blanket cut across the board on everything. Its selective. There are programs that are doing well, and are producing valuable education. Nobody wants to cut those...what needs to be cut are the programs that have been epic failures and have no expectation of ever producing anything more than failure.

Im sick to death of people accusing fellow americans of being uncaring for wanting to be thrifty and manage finances properly.

I have an idea about this. Any program that has recieved funding, and within 1 year cannot produce any evidence (good or bad) with regards to the funding's purpose, stop funding immediately. In another 6 months, if they still cannot produce evidence...they have to pay back everything they got.

In other words. If they get funded to build a low-income housing development, and 1 year later, they havent even stuck a shovel in the ground. THE FUNDING STOPS. If a scientist gets funded to study ice flows in Antartica, and a year later, he hasnt even left texas yet. THE FUNDING STOPS. If a school district gets funding to build three new schools and hire 20 teachers, and in a year, they have a new football stadium, but no new schools or teachers. THE FUNDING STOPS.

Did it ever occur you you that the reason our economy is shifting away from manufacturing has little to do with education, and more to do with corporations being forced to go overseas because of high corporate taxes.
You underestimate the American. We have been, and can be a world leader in manufacturing again...IF we stop abusing the corporations that would provide this opportunity to us.

Imagine if you will that you stopped having any taxes for a year. Now you get all your paycheck. Since you are a responsible american, you decide to use that surplus in your finances to pay off all your debt. So now you have no taxes and no debt.
Would you not be in a better place with that plan, then under a plan where you have huge debt, and tons of taxes?

(lowered taxes on wealthy, eventually raised taxes on everyone else + corporations, attempted to lower spending but ultimately raised spending significantly in all but 1 year, running large deficits that ended up as large as ever had been seen by the end of his 2nd term). "Reaganism" didn't work for Reagan. Let alone any of the pretenders or the clueless soundbite repeaters of today's political world.

I dont know if you were even alive during Reagan...but this simply is a LIE thats been passed around. Including from Obama.
Reagan passed the largest tax cut in american history, and it was 25% across the board. The tax cut was for EVERYBODY, there wasnt one single taxpayer that didnt get a cut. I know, I was there. . The liberals keep telling everyone that it was only a tax cut for the wealthy. And the up and coming generation that is now voting, that wasnt actually alive (or still in diapers) during that time eats it up like its fact. The truth is that is a BALD FACED LIE.
And because of his Reagan's tax cut, unemployment went down to below 5%, 17 million new jobs 81-89...which came out to 2 million per year. And we saw the biggest economic recovery in the history of the US.

Deficit...thats funny coming from a Obama supporter. Hows that working out for you? Let me count the 14 trillion ways.

California should be an example to us of how NOT to run a government. They have the highest taxes in the nation, and the highest spending in the nation. They are FLAT BROKE. When Gov Wilson(R) who subscribed to Reagan's policies handed the state over to Gov Davis (D) a liberal democrat, they had a 12 BILLION dollar surplus. Within 4 years, Gov Davis had managed to turn that 12 Billion dollar surplus into a 35 Billion dollar deficit. Turning a surplus into a huge deficit. Sound familiar.

One of my favorite quotes from Reagan was when he said "We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. But that would be an insult to drunken sailors, because the drunken sailors are spending their own money."

The current administration would have you belive that taking water from the deep end of the pool (wealthy), and pouring it into the shallow end (poor) will somehow increase the amount of water in the pool.
It isnt going to work, and it has never worked.