Financial collapse picking up speed [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Financial collapse picking up speed


beforeobamabans
05-16-2012, 03:27
The inevitable run-on-the-banks has begun in Greece as their default and ejection from the EU looms. Smart Greeks understand that when that moment comes, their life savings will be converted from Euros to worthless Dracmas overnight without their permission. There will be riots in the streets. An authoritarian leftist government will seize control placating the public with promises of order and control. Once again, humans willingly trade freedom for "safety".

Meanwhile, neighboring bankrupt countries Spain, Portugal and Italy see these events unfolding and experience their own bank runs. Spain, which already has 25% unemployment, dissolves into chaos. The people yearn for a Franco type dictatorship. Germany rolls up the welcome mat and as the only viable economy in Europe, dumps the Euro and starts printing massive volumes of Deutchmarks. Inflation soars. Economies crash. True depression ensues. Democracy is blamed as unworkable leaving nearly every country under authoritarian control. It's only a matter of time before authoritarian governments create external enemies to take the public spotlight off of their own domestic failures. Europe will see war once again.

What of the US? It depends which path we choose to follow. We can re-elect Obama, go another 5 Trillion out onto the debt high wire, attempt to save the world and like Germany, get sucked into the vortex of collapse. Or....

callihan_44
05-16-2012, 06:03
hunker down folks, this storm aint over yet

DonGlock26
05-16-2012, 06:35
So It Begins - YouTube

JBnTX
05-16-2012, 06:37
You gloom and doomers were right six months ago when you predicted a second round of bank failures.

Most of the professional financial insiders didn't even see this coming.

Hmm?

beforeobamabans
05-16-2012, 08:27
You gloom and doomers were right six months ago when you predicted a second round of bank failures.

Most of the professional financial insiders didn't even see this coming.

Hmm?

The Fed doubled-down (quadruple may be more accurate) to prevent this from happening here in 2008 by cranking up the printing presses. Their hope is that inflation and growth will save them. They are getting neither because our spineless fiscal policies are adding to the debt rather than offsetting it. Note that those European countries using the common currency gave up their sovereign right to do this and are therefore at the mercy of the whole. Britain is proven right to have kept the Pound. Do you see the connection between the welfare state and the public's refusal to accept "austerity"? Here, we won't even accept a cut in the rate of growth, let alone real reductions in outlays. It may take a decade or two forthe whole house of cards to unwind but like they say, "bubbles always end badly".

pugman
05-16-2012, 09:23
TWe can re-elect Obama, go another 5 Trillion out onto the debt high wire, attempt to save the world and like Germany, get sucked into the vortex of collapse. Or....

I am no supporter of Obama but you are making a crucial error here assuming electing any other candidate will reverse the spending frenzy of the U.S; the other side does not have a plan.

One key element in the difference between the U.S and Greece is the makeup of our economies. Nearly 20% of Greece's population works directly in tourism. How do I put this second part delicately....Greeks are lazy? The average worker's productivity produces somewhere around $20-22USD per hour towards GDP about half the average U.S worker and ironically very close to Spain - another country in deep financial trouble. The average Greek works just over 1800 hours per year (these are pre-crisis numbers) the average U.S worker is over 2100 - look at your own work week and this is the equivalent of having two months off. BTW: the top 4th countries per worker GDP contributions - Norway, Luxembourg, Netherlands and the U.S. What does this tell us? Even hard working citizens can't stop a run away train like the Fed

The Federal Government's march towards failure will happen if Greece riots or not.

The one to watch is Italy. Greece's complete failure is absorbable by the EU - Italy's economy being 7-8 times the size of Greece's and a top 8 world economy is another story. Germany won't like it and Greece will like it less if Germany starts to exercise options they should. Greece failing to the EU would be the equivalent of Indiana failing in the U.S. Italy failing to the EU is the equivalent of Indiana along with Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, Utah, Arkansas, DC, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Hawaii, West Virginia, Delaware, New Hampshire, Idaho, Maine, Rhode Island, Alaska, North/South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Vermont

beforeobamabans
05-16-2012, 12:15
I am no supporter of Obama but you are making a crucial error here assuming electing any other candidate will reverse the spending frenzy of the U.S;
I disagree.

It is not too late for the US to back away from financial Armageddon. I believe that the American people will sacrifice for their survival given the proper policies and leadership. It remains a mystery whether or not Romney can provide either but if he's the businessman he claims to be and brings in a huge team of turnaround artists, we can get things under control. Just the appearance of real plans to eliminate the deficit, begin working on the national debt, a real energy development policy, a rollback of onerous anti-capitalist regulations, and an immigration policy would once again make us the financial safe harbor for the world.

It can still be done.

G29Reload
05-16-2012, 12:40
Based on the news I heard today on the Fox Business channel, that's what i'd do if I was Greek.

I'd take every dollar of savings out in Euros, and buy equal amounts of gold/silver, English Pounds, American dollars, Swiss Francs. Maybe keep some of the Euros since it should stabilize once Greece was out.

But it would NOT be in a Greek financial institution.

The greeks are spoiled rotten. They refuse to behave and start disciplining themselves. They can retire at 50 and collect most of their pre-retirement salary and riot when there's any talk of fixing that broken, unsustainable system.

maxsnafu
05-16-2012, 12:50
I disagree.

It is not too late for the US to back away from financial Armageddon. I believe that the American people will sacrifice for their survival given the proper policies and leadership. It remains a mystery whether or not Romney can provide either but if he's the businessman he claims to be and brings in a huge team of turnaround artists, we can get things under control. Just the appearance of real plans to eliminate the deficit, begin working on the national debt, a real energy development policy, a rollback of onerous anti-capitalist regulations, and an immigration policy would once again make us the financial safe harbor for the world.

It can still be done.

Really? How are we going to fund $120 trillion (and that's a low ball estimate) in looming Social Security & Medicare payments--AND Medicaid & all combined welfare handouts?
Your darned right someone's going to have to sacrifice, but who? Baby boomer retirees don't riot but the underclass does. It's pretty clear who's going to be doing the sacrificing.

Alizard
05-16-2012, 13:39
I am no supporter of Obama but you are making a crucial error here assuming electing any other candidate will reverse the spending frenzy of the U.S; the other side does not have a plan.
They have a plan:

1) Give the wealthy a giant tax cut. That is the GOP answer to every problem. Rich people start businesses, therefore all problems are solved by not taxing the rich. Unemployment will disappear.

God help us. Look how well that worked under Dubya's terms.

2) Run like the wind. Ask any GOP politician this question:

Ok.... you blame the dems for "reckless spending" and claim no new taxes are necessary to balance the budget.... EXACTLY WHAT WILL YOU CUT?

Watch them stammer and run.

The truth is the giant money sinks are Defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare. Those MUST be cut, but they will never admit it.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_pie_gs.php

I honestly hope Romney gets elected. It will be a real education. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to relive it.


Here's a preview:


Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record



The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton‘s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.


http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

4TS&W
05-16-2012, 13:44
Where do the riots go when the banks and government say, "OK, riot all you want. There is no more money.."

4TS&W
05-16-2012, 13:46
I honestly hope Romney gets elected.

Me too! Glad we're on the same page with this.

Quoted for posterity.

beforeobamabans
05-16-2012, 13:46
Really? How are we going to fund $120 trillion (and that's a low ball estimate) in looming Social Security & Medicare payments--AND Medicaid & all combined welfare handouts?
Your darned right someone's going to have to sacrifice, but who? Baby boomer retirees don't riot but the underclass does. It's pretty clear who's going to be doing the sacrificing.

That's why I supported Ron Paul in the primary even though his policies go against my personal financial interests. You see, it is not necessary to actually solve that problem today. Just the introduction of a plan to put us on a corrective trajectory would restore confidence, rocket the markets, attract endless global capital, entice trillions in corporate padding off the sidelines, reignite investment, risk taking and growth. GDP would instantly go to +5%, creating enough jobs to reduce unemployment and swell government revenues without tax increases. It's really quite simple.

maxsnafu
05-16-2012, 14:06
That's why I supported Ron Paul in the primary even though his policies go against my personal financial interests. You see, it is not necessary to actually solve that problem today. Just the introduction of a plan to put us on a corrective trajectory would restore confidence, rocket the markets, attract endless global capital, entice trillions in corporate padding off the sidelines, reignite investment, risk taking and growth. GDP would instantly go to +5%, creating enough jobs to reduce unemployment and swell government revenues without tax increases. It's really quite simple.

Too bad none of that is going to happen.

Gunnut 45/454
05-16-2012, 14:38
Alizard
Well you almost had it right! Defense has been cut already. What hasn't been cut are all the Unconstituional socialist programs! We can cut alot before it ever comes to hurting anyone! The Dumocrats just want to raise taxes and spend more! They don't want to cut anything but Defense! Removing a ton of Government redtape( Regulations will also save a ton of money as we'll not need those Government workers to enforce them! Scrap Obama care = saves over a trillion!:supergrin:

Kablam
05-16-2012, 14:52
Alizard-
I think the idea really is to not RAISE taxes on upper incomes, not to "Give the wealthy a giant tax cut." Trying to be inflamatory makes you sound like you're lying.

427
05-16-2012, 15:10
They have a plan:

1) Give the wealthy a giant tax cut. That is the GOP answer to every problem. Rich people start businesses, therefore all problems are solved by not taxing the rich. Unemployment will disappear.

God help us. Look how well that worked under Dubya's terms.

2) Run like the wind. Ask any GOP politician this question:

Ok.... you blame the dems for "reckless spending" and claim no new taxes are necessary to balance the budget.... EXACTLY WHAT WILL YOU CUT?

Watch them stammer and run.

The truth is the giant money sinks are Defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare. Those MUST be cut, but they will never admit it.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_pie_gs.php

I honestly hope Romney gets elected. It will be a real education. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to relive it.


Here's a preview:

Here are some facts.

January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At that time:

DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

Unemployment rate was 4.6%

Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!


***ON THAT DAY, JANUARY 3RD 2007:

Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee.
Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?

BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!!!

DEMOCRATS took us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!
BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was Financially risky for the US economy. McCain asked Congress to reform Fannie and Freddie several times too . . . and the Democrats howled every time.

Who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? Obama.
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? Obama.

If you want to talk about federal spending compare the budget deficts under the Dems and to when the republicans had Congress.

You'll note that we've not had a fed budget as required by law under Obama, just continuing resolutions.

series1811
05-16-2012, 15:14
I honestly hope Romney gets elected. :

What generation Glock do you like the best, fifth or sixth?

Alizard
05-16-2012, 15:37
If you want to talk about federal spending compare the budget deficts under the Dems and to when the republicans had Congress. That's the great thing I love about revisionists..... when we look at Reagans years and Dubyas and see the skyrocketing deficits.... let's blame it all on congress.

facts are stubborn things: do you know who SIGNS THE BUDGET INTO LAW?

THE PRESIDENT

Do you know who signs into law any legislation from congress?

THE PRESIDENT


But anytime there is rampant deficits... find a way to forget about the facts and blame the democrats.


BUT ONE QUESTION:

The GOP is blaming Obama for all the economic woes, skyrocketing spending etc...... but which party has had control of the House for two years?

Which party has enough votes in the senate to block any vote (which takes 60 votes to force an end to debate and get to a vote)?

The GOP

In current practice, the threat of filibuster is more important than its use; almost any motion that does not have the support of three-fifths of the Senate effectively fails. This means that 41 senators, which could represent as little as 12.3% of the U.S. population, can make a filibuster happen.

2011 US Senate makeup:
51 Dem
47 Rep
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_makeup_of_the_2011_US_Senate#ixzz1v4UO8Th2




So basically, you just switch whenever needed to blame the dems: when there's a dem president, it's the president to blame for deficits. When it's a GOP pres, blame the congress.

Look up the definition of hypocrisy.

Ruble Noon
05-16-2012, 15:44
The greeks are spoiled rotten. They refuse to behave and start disciplining themselves. They can retire at 50 and collect most of their pre-retirement salary and riot when there's any talk of fixing that broken, unsustainable system.


Are you sure you are talking about Greece and not America's public employees?

Alizard
05-16-2012, 15:51
How do you blame this one on the dems? Are they the ones who rammed through the tax cuts for the rich?

Under Republican leadership, economic common sense was upended. The national debt (http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001668.htm) tripled under Ronald Reagan and, after the budget surpluses of the later Clinton years, doubled again under George W. Bush. As analyses from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities show, the Bush tax cuts (http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001892.htm) accounted for almost half the mushrooming deficits during the last decade (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=692) and, if made permanent, over the next 10 years (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036) would produce more red ink over than two wars, TARP, the Obama stimulus package and the revenue lost to the recession combined.


That Republican "debt orgy (http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001892.htm)," as Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) aptly labeled it, largely served to produce a massive transfer of wealth to the richest Americans needing it least. (That perverse development is reflected in "the Bush 400 (http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001766.htm)", the richest 400 taxpayers in the United States who saw their incomes double and tax rates halved between 2001 and 2007.) As the New York Times' David Leonhardt (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html) noted last year, that windfall for the wealthy, the Medicare prescription program, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were never paid forhttp://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001899.htm



http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp87.pdf
The Republican Spending Explosion

barbedwiresmile
05-16-2012, 15:57
Where do the riots go when the banks and government say, "OK, riot all you want. There is no more money.."

Go long batons, body armor, taxers, drones, and LRAD.

Boon for defense contractors and public employees pensions.

Alizard
05-16-2012, 16:09
Never saw such a concise obliteration of the BIG LIE being peddled right now about the economy and deficits:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201107150034

Right-Wing Media Revive GOP Talking Point That Deficit Is "A Spending Problem, Not A Revenue Problem"



GOP Talking Point: "Washington Has A Spending Problem, Not A Revenue Problem"

Boehner: "Washington Has A Spending Problem, Not A Revenue Problem."

Fox And Other Conservative Outlets Revive GOP Talking Point

Big Government: "The Current Mess We're In Has Nothing To Do With Revenue And Everything To Do With Overspending."

Neal Boortz: "Look, This Is A Spending Problem. It Is Not A Revenue Problem."



AND HERE IS THE REALITY CHECK:




But Numerous Economic Experts Say That We Have A Revenue Problem

Krugman: "Government Spending Has Continued To Rise More Or Less On Its Pre-Crisis Trend" While "Revenue Has Plunged." In an October 17, 2010, blog post, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote:

During the pre-crisis period, spending grew slightly faster than GDP -- that's Medicare plus the Bush wars -- while revenue grew more slowly, presumably reflecting tax cuts.
What happened after the crisis? Spending continued to grow at roughly the same rate -- a bulge in safety net programs, offset by budget-slashing at the state and local level. GDP stalled -- which is why the ratio of spending to GDP rose. And revenue plunged, leading to big deficits.
But I'm sure that the usual suspects will find ways to keep believing that it's all about runaway spending. [NewYorkTimes.com, 10/18/10 (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fkrugman.blogs.nytimes.com%2F2010%2F10%2F18%2Feven-more-on-the-origins-of-the-deficit%2F)]




Former Reagan OMB Official: "I Think The Biggest Problem Is Revenues." In an interview with Talking Points Memo, David Stockman, a former Office of Management and Budget director under President Reagan, responded to Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) budget plan and stated: "I think the biggest problem is revenues. It is simply unrealistic to say that raising revenue isn't part of the solution."


David Cay Johnston: "There Is A Simple, Factual Way To Describe What Is Happening To Our Government: We Have A Revenue Problem."


Harvard Business Review Group Director: "[T]he Giant Deficit Is Mainly The Result Of The Collapse In Tax Receipts Brought On By The Recession."


Lawrence Haas: "Sorry, The Federal Deficit Isn't A Spending Problem." In a February 3 Fiscal Times column headlined, "Sorry, the Federal Deficit Isn't a Spending Problem," ////// "[I]f you want to blame our looming deficits on policy changes, you would look not to spending but, rather, taxes -- specifically, to President Bush's huge tax cuts of 2001 and 2003."

callihan_44
05-16-2012, 16:28
Never saw such a concise obliteration of the BIG LIE being peddled right now about the economy and deficits:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201107150034








media matters? gtfo of here, WHERE THE HELL IS THE BUDGET? SO you believe ONLY the rich got a tax break huh? that's bs and you know it!

Sendarr
05-16-2012, 16:41
Lolmediamatterslol

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

The Machinist
05-16-2012, 16:52
Paul Krugman is not an economics expert. Using him to buttress your argument in favor of higher taxes shows how easily-led, and how out of your depth you really are.

Kablam
05-16-2012, 16:52
It's funny how the Bush tax rates (not cuts anymore...stop the rhetoric) are blamed for deficits when federal governement revenues have been at an all time high for the past few years. Could the feds be possibly spending too f'n much?

Just1More
05-16-2012, 16:53
They have a plan:

2) Run like the wind. Ask any GOP politician this question:

Ok.... you blame the dems for "reckless spending" and claim no new taxes are necessary to balance the budget.... EXACTLY WHAT WILL YOU CUT?

Watch them stammer and run.

The truth is the giant money sinks are Defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare. Those MUST be cut, but they will never admit it.

:

You mean cut the Democrat sponsored ponzi schemes, right? Basically, all the programs the Democrats pushed for in the last 50 years are getting ready to crash. It started with "Everybody deserves a house".

The is no argument against this.

rhikdavis
05-16-2012, 17:33
It started with "Everybody deserves a house".




And a car....coughcashforclunkerscough...

427
05-16-2012, 17:36
That's the great thing I love about revisionists..... when we look at Reagans years and Dubyas and see the skyrocketing deficits.... let's blame it all on congress.

facts are stubborn things: do you know who SIGNS THE BUDGET INTO LAW?

THE PRESIDENT

Do you know who signs into law any legislation from congress?

THE PRESIDENT


But anytime there is rampant deficits... find a way to forget about the facts and blame the democrats.


BUT ONE QUESTION:

The GOP is blaming Obama for all the economic woes, skyrocketing spending etc...... but which party has had control of the House for two years?

Which party has enough votes in the senate to block any vote (which takes 60 votes to force an end to debate and get to a vote)?

The GOP






So basically, you just switch whenever needed to blame the dems: when there's a dem president, it's the president to blame for deficits. When it's a GOP pres, blame the congress.

Look up the definition of hypocrisy.



Under Clinton who was responsible for the budget "surplus"? The Republican Congress? Or clinton?

For the past thirty years which party in control of congress has had the biggest deficits?

When Obama and his party have had control of congress why wasn't a budget passed?

What happened to the budgets that the Republicans have presented in the House under Obama's watch?

Who has passed entitlements that theres no way to fund?

BTW, didn't Obama and his Congress raise the debt limit earlier in his term?

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership . Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.
Then Senator, Barack Obama March 16, 2006.

Talk about hypocrisy...

concretefuzzynuts
05-16-2012, 17:40
Copy, paste, copy, paste, copy, paste.....Alizard.

sbhaven
05-16-2012, 18:03
AND HERE IS THE REALITY CHECK:

But Numerous Economic Experts Say That We Have A Revenue Problem

Krugman: "Government Spending Has Continued To Rise More Or Less On Its Pre-Crisis Trend" While "Revenue Has Plunged." In an October 17, 2010, blog post, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote...
:rofl: Krugman, really? He's the joke the progressives trots out any time they want lend an air of legitamacy to their failed policies.

Krugman is such a joke that he got spanked routinely on his own blog. So much so that one person (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/europes-gap/?permid=20#comment20) actually post this...
Who is this guy Sean from Florida? He takes everything that Professor and shreds it, piece by piece. He shouldn't be allowed to post his comments on this blog since he seems to be winning all the debates. We progressives need to stick together and embellish our talking points without someone from the outside pointing out fallacies in our ideology.
:rofl:

4TS&W
05-16-2012, 19:53
You don't need the revenue if you cut back the spending. Look at what Krugman said. He said spending is on a pre crisis trend (upward). Obviously, if you have a crisis, revenues are going to go down. To most it is obvious that your spending must go down as well to match the dwindling revenue. To libs, the solution is to try to tax up some more revenue where there isn't any. Obviously if that were the solution, we should just raise taxes until we're solvent. But raising taxes only ends up dropping revenue more, because it chills the market and discourages economic activity. Look what happened to the Russian revenues when they went to a flat tax!

When revenues go down, taxing and spending more is a vicious death spiral. Spending must go down to supportable levels, which will then allow the market to recover.

G29Reload
05-16-2012, 21:18
They have a plan:

1) Give the wealthy a giant tax cut. That is the GOP answer to every problem. Rich people start businesses, therefore all problems are solved by not taxing the rich. Unemployment will disappear.

Worked pretty well under Reagan.



God help us. Look how well that worked under Dubya's terms.

The first 6 years, prior to the dems taking over congress were actually pretty good.

And I'd take that over what the human wrecking ball, BHO has us in now. Prime example that you're wrong, and that leftist economic thinking is utter crap. Failed ideology.

Mitt actually earned a paycheck in high finance and knows what works. I've met 7-11 clerks who actually work for a living that have more economic sense than BHO.

Oh, but he looks good in a suit on The View, and knows what the Kardashians are up to. Rah rah.

series1811
05-17-2012, 05:35
It's funny how the Bush tax rates (not cuts anymore...stop the rhetoric) are blamed for deficits when federal governement revenues have been at an all time high for the past few years. Could the feds be possibly spending too f'n much?

Government spending too much? That phrase is just not in liberals' vocabulary.

Makes you wonder how they run their households.

"Honey, our debt is getting a little high. Think we should spend a little less?"

"Hell, no. Let's either borrow some more, or you can take a second job. But, we are not going to spend less. Everybody except Republicans knows that is a recipe for disaster."

PocketProtector
05-17-2012, 05:47
Government expansion bleeds the Private sector. When we have a budget, it automatically increases 8+/_% per year. That means the Private sector must fill that gap each and every year.

Anyone think that helps businesses expand and hire???

.GOV is expanding exponentially for the singular purpose of gathering power over the masses. THAT is the END GAME.

Paul7
05-17-2012, 10:45
How do you blame this one on the dems? Are they the ones who rammed through the tax cuts for the rich?

http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001899.htm

After the Reagan tax cuts federal tax receipts doubled. A similar thing happened when JFK did it. That isn't supposed to happen, at least if you're a liberal. Conversely, tax receipts often fall when taxes are raised. But hey, it's all about class warfare anyway.

The real freeloaders in the US are the 50% who pay no income taxes.

Face it, Alizard, your preferred plan isn't working.

series1811
05-17-2012, 10:54
The real freeloaders in the US are the 50% who pay no income taxes.


Also known as the Democrat's base.

concretefuzzynuts
05-17-2012, 11:04
Also known as the Democrat's base.

:rofl::rofl:

aircarver
05-17-2012, 11:26
It's hard to have income tax cuts for those who pay no taxes.....

But the 'earned income credit' comes close ......:steamed:

.

series1811
05-17-2012, 11:30
It's hard to have income tax cuts for those who pay no taxes.....

But the 'earned income credit' comes close ......:steamed:

.

I was talking to one of their "base" one day at a place I worked in college, years ago, back when the earned income credit was first being thought up.

He was all excited about getting a tax refund when he paid no taxes and I asked how that was possible? He told me that the government used the tax returns of people who had died before they could get them. :supergrin:

And, yes, I don't know for certain, but I am reasonably sure he voted for Obama. :whistling:

G29Reload
05-17-2012, 11:32
Face it, Alizard, your preferred plan isn't working.

You do notice of course, that when he's presented with logic and facts plus actual history on the matter he runs away and doesn't have an answer.

Drive-by liberal.

G29Reload
05-17-2012, 11:33
BTW, didn't Obama and his Congress raise the debt limit earlier in his term?

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership . Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.
Then Senator, Barack Obama March 16, 2006.



Talk about hypocrisy...


The most dishonest president in the history of the republic.

Paul7
05-17-2012, 13:30
Also known as the Democrat's base.

Yes, the ones who vote (not work) for a living.

pugman
05-22-2012, 16:29
Really? How are we going to fund $120 trillion (and that's a low ball estimate) in looming Social Security & Medicare payments--AND Medicaid & all combined welfare handouts?
Your darned right someone's going to have to sacrifice, but who? Baby boomer retirees don't riot but the underclass does. It's pretty clear who's going to be doing the sacrificing.

Actually, a professor from Boston University now puts this number around $211 Trillion over the next thirty years.

I disagree.

It is not too late for the US to back away from financial Armageddon. I believe that the American people will sacrifice for their survival given the proper policies and leadership. It remains a mystery whether or not Romney can provide either but if he's the businessman he claims to be and brings in a huge team of turnaround artists, we can get things under control. Just the appearance of real plans to eliminate the deficit, begin working on the national debt, a real energy development policy, a rollback of onerous anti-capitalist regulations, and an immigration policy would once again make us the financial safe harbor for the world.

It can still be done.

I agree its possible - no politican has the sand to do it.

They have a plan:

1) Give the wealthy a giant tax cut. That is the GOP answer to every problem. Rich people start businesses, therefore all problems are solved by not taxing the rich. Unemployment will disappear.

God help us. Look how well that worked under Dubya's terms.

2) Run like the wind. Ask any GOP politician this question:

Ok.... you blame the dems for "reckless spending" and claim no new taxes are necessary to balance the budget.... EXACTLY WHAT WILL YOU CUT?

Watch them stammer and run.

The truth is the giant money sinks are Defense spending, Social Security, and Medicare. Those MUST be cut, but they will never admit it.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_pie_gs.php

I honestly hope Romney gets elected. It will be a real education. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to relive it.


Here's a preview:

This isn't a plan...Dems tax and spend...Republicans borrow and spend (although Obama is seemingly breaking this trend).

No politican has a real plan or the b*lls to implement it