1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Since the Debt doesn't matter...

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by GenSeneca, Dec 8, 2008.

  1. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Since the debt is only a number, deficit spending is no big deal, and there are no repercussions in the government spending money it doesn't have... Why don't we try a more radical "Change" for our beloved Welfare State?

    The bailouts, of which the total amount is going up every day, have added just less than 8 trillion dollars of debt to the budget. That's 8,000,000,000,000 - Why fart around with saving fat cats and big corporations? Lets just be proud of the fact that we're a welfare state and go all out...

    First, lets look at the population... somewhere around 306-330 million people. Now subtract from that number everyone who is under 18, everyone who has been found guilty of committing a felony, everyone who is not a US citizen and everyone who earns more than $250,000 a year... then we're left with just less than 100 million people.

    Instead of bailouts for evil corporations, we could have given the lowest 1/3 of our population $80,000.00 each... Talk about eliminating poverty overnight. Talk about an economic stimulus package... 100 million Americans with $80k in their pocket to drive our consumer economy with their new spending.

    We could eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and focus our nations resources on this expanded Welfare program. Also, we should nationalize the entire healthcare system in the US for the implementation of a National Healthcare system controlled, and run, by our government - after all, the government doesn't have to declare bankruptcy and shut down operations if they can't pay their bills, but the private sector does. Government can just push their losses into the deficit and eventually our national debt (which is just a number - with no consequence, ever).

    If we continue this policy of handing out $80k a year to the lowest on the totem pole, it will not only eliminate poverty, it will virtually eliminate crime in America: After all, being found guilty of a felony will make someone ineligible for their welfare money; how many would-be criminals will risk giving up an unearned $80k a year to commit a felonious crime? Not many.

    Lets not stop there... after all, deficits don't matter and the debt is only a number... so lets eliminate the mandatory taxation of America's citizens and evil American corporations - that should help boost the economy. All US citizens would be on their own to decide how much they'd like to chip in for taxes, if any, on a purely voluntary basis. Lets tax only the evil foreign companies operating in the US and the foreigners living in the US - heavily - not for the sake of revenue, but for the sake of "fairness".

    Why not do these things? After all, deficits don't matter, the debt is only a number, and there are no consequences to our national spending habits... right? That is what the politicians, pundits and their lackeys all tell us anyway.
     
  2. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You've gone on a bender, haven'tcha'?

    Do you really think that employing reverse psychology (sort of... ) will help them to see through to the truth? I'm sorry but they can't see it and couldn't deal with it if they could. It's a time-honored tradition going back thousands of years...
     
  3. The Scotsman

    The Scotsman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    South of the Haggis Munching Line
    ..........do I detect a certain amount of cynisism in your post....:D

    Like the US I suspect, the UK Government is borrowing vast sums of money for spending on....on... well god knows what really! The Banks that the tax payers have bailed out (and now own) are being virually instructed to increase loans to the public and busniness in order to "oil the cogs of the economy" but, well..... forgive my dimwittedness but wasn't it debt and borrowing that got us in the mess in the first place?
     
  4. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,923
    Likes Received:
    491
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Uh huh, sure. First post, and it's about a path to instant wealth. Not an ad, no, no, it's not anything like the spam emails we constantly get, not at all. I'm convinced now that there is free money just lying around for anyone who has made some poor financial decisions.:rolleyes:

    And, I'm further convinced that the government can actually give all of the poor and middle class 80 grand a year forever. Why work? Why budget? Money is just growing on trees everywhere.

    Why pay taxes? If the government can create wealth just by passing a law, then we shouldn't have to bother with that pesky business of sending the government money to operate on, unless, of course, we're in that privileged over a quarter of a million category.

    Of course, the tiny little downside of such a plan would be that it might just cost $250 grand for a loaf of bread pretty soon.

    You know, kind of like the same thing that happened in some of the South American republics that tried to balance their budgets by printing more money.

    I was in Bolivia from '64 to '66. At that time the Boliviano was trading at 12,500 to a dollar. The government solved that problem by issuing Bolivian Pesos at 1,000 pesos to a Boliviano. That brought the price of a restaurant meal down to around 10 to 20 pesos for an entree, or about what a meal in a US restaurant costs in US dollars today. Already, the value of a dollar is about what a Bolivian Peso was in '66.

    If we keep up the deficit spending, pretty soon the dollar will go the way of the Boliviano.

    US pesos, anyone? Just $1,000 each, about the price of a bus ride.

    Other than that tiny little drawback, deficits don't matter. Reagan and his Democratic Congress proved that back in '84 after all.
     
  5. Mr.Dysfunctional

    Mr.Dysfunctional New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Future World order of China
    The horribly sad thing about it all is that GenSeneca's 80k for all plan actually makes much more sence then the current effort by the Bush Admin and Fed...

    BTW Gen.. you now have my nomination for 2012 presidency... Anyone who will put 80k in my pocket gets my vote.. LAWL!!!!
     
  6. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why... did he offer to give you the wheelbarrow that you're going to need to carry said money to the store to buy a loaf of bread?
     
  7. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    No, instead lets end all social programs within 2 years. Anything not constitutionally mandated needs to be done away with. Only customs, active military, and executive, legislative, and judicial branch every day costs and eliminate all financial assistance to the states immediately!

    Abolish most of the justice department, including the FBI, and most other enforcement bodies. Leaving only a budget for the USSC, and a small amount of other things.

    Have a land auction of all federal lands, and basically eliminate the need for the department of the interior.

    Then eliminate entirely the following entitlement riddled rich people leaching departments
    -Agriculture
    -Commerce
    -Labor
    -HHS
    -HUD
    -Transportation
    -Energy
    -Education
    -Veteran Affairs
    -Homeland Security
    -all foreign aide
    -all market regulation means
    and plenty of other things

    That way the feds are kept in check and we can minimize the tax burden on Americans. Then we can create that utopia that is so craved. Think about it, it would be so great to have the aristocracy that the founding fathers actually wanted.

    I cant wait for the day that I can pay my employees what I think they are worth with consideration to maximize my personal bottom line. That way I can invest more into my business and hire more people on a wage they cant afford to live on.

    Then I can build private infastructure without regard anyone else, and trade in the market freely without that pesky government oversight.:rolleyes:


    -GenSeneca, the fact of the matter is that the debt does matter as is evidenced now. Is that debt does matter, always has and always will. It boils down to a vastly inept leadership that has allowed this to happen, especially unchecked for 8 years, while lowering taxes. Now I know for a fact that I dont have the ability to do this with my checkbook, but when George W. Bush and long dead of natural causes, I and my kids, and probably grand kids will be paying for the situation we find ourselves in.

    Personally Id rather have a tax and spend democrat in the leadership, rather than a borrow and blow Republican. Cheney showed his lack of touch with reality when he said that deficits dont matter.
     
  8. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's pretty-much what's gotten us where we are......again. :rolleyes:

     
  9. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Precedence (to support your desires) already exists (behind that curtain of BUSHCO-distractions).
     
  10. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Obama has promised to continue such "Failed" policies... :rolleyes:

    No Change, More of the Same.

    OBAMACO and GREED INC. have merged, sending the stock market soaring!
     
  11. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    In what way? What are the repercussions? The pundits and politicians are not talking about any negatives befalling our nation as a result... the politcians are pushing for TRILLIONS more in NEW spending - to SPEND our way out of a recession..... Both sides think this is a good idea - the point of my OP - yet you want to scapegoat Republicans? You want to make fun of Conservatives and their goals? Does that make you feel better? I hope you derive some enjoyment from it, because it certainly does NOTHING to address the problem I broached, it doesn't pay down the debt one single dime, it doesn't change the fact that we ARE a Welfare State, and there is no "Change" in sight.

    We're in a bus, heading toward a cliff... and everyone thinks if we just shift into high gear, put the peddle to the floor, and have "Hope", the bus will magically fly - rather than crash when we go over the edge.
    "Republicans are worse!" what kind of reasoning is that? Its not reasoning at all... thats the kind of "wisdom" I expect from bazooka Joe wrappers and cracker jack boxes... I would expect such a "pearl of wisdom" from Shaman but expect more of you....

    How about you be realistic with your replies and address my concerns? Are you happy we are a welfare state? Do you want to see the welfare "nanny" state continue to grow and gobble up your rights in trade for a coddled life? In another thread you rail about giving up our liberties for physical security... yet you don't equally see how letting government grow to the point where it can take care of you from cradle to grave erodes our liberties?

    Neither side is going to "Fix" our debt problem, the debt will grow every year - as it always has - until it crushes our nation. You say it does matter... but you leave it at that... afraid to really think about it and give it serious thought? WHERE do you draw the line, at what point will you say - "that it! No more of this!"?

    "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Jefferson
     
  12. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    In the short term it causes inflation. Potentially in the long term, think about who is buying our debt, mostly the Chinese and Saudis, and certainly you know neither are really our friends.
    Its not a good idea, it is the only viable idea the idiots in DC have. Its either provide corporate welfare to these mega companies, or see millions of people lose thier jobs. Which would you rather have?
    :rolleyes: You and I both know that was not the purpose of your OP. It was to make unrealistic statements aimed towards democrats. Turnabout is fair play.
    Maybe a little, but I think you are failing to understand that "Conservatism"
    is generally dead among the politicians that are actually elected. There hasnt been a conservative in the WH since 84.
    We are a welfare state? I am not buying that. The vast majority of Americans earn every penny they have. But I will say that there are cases where people for various reasons and methods do need assistance. I am not interested in making the poor even more poor.
    We would be fine if our expenditures were much more close to our income as a nation. There is no question GWB has been allowed spending to spiral out of control with zero plan to actually pay for any of it, except to pass the debt onto me, as a late 20s working man, that I will be paying for the rest of my life. I hope those kids in Iraq like thier new schools, while my community is forced to bond for basic repairs to our education facilities.
    Oh you can give that whole second sentence line of thinking a big rest. I am not going to play that game. :rolleyes:
    I put a lot of blame on the President. It wouldnt matter what party he was from. I believe in living within my means. I am OK with welfare as long as it is being paid for. When we are handing out welfare on credit, it is idiotic.
    How about you be more realistic with your OP.
    What rights are we giving up? please do tell me what rights you are being stripped of by someone getting a college grant, or public housing, or reduced medical costs.
    I addressed this ealier, but where do I draw the line? I draw the line where we continue to decrease our tax revenue while not being concerned at all about spending. The biggest thing we can do to address the federal debt is to not continue these very dangerous defecit spending that has been rampant under the Bush administration.
     
  13. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Obama says it doesn't matter. Did you miss the memo? Are you defying the spoken word of Obama?

    Actually... it's going to do both. Corporations are going to get the money, AND millions are going to lose their jobs. That's according to their own plan by the way. Go look it up.


    We are a welfare state? I am not buying that. The vast majority of Americans earn every penny they have. But I will say that there are cases where people for various reasons and methods do need assistance. I am not interested in making the poor even more poor.

    Funny how instantly selfish we get, isn't it? I thought you supported helping the poor?

    Anyway, you are still missing the main point. That is, you are missing the fact that Obama is going to increase spending even more than GWB. And by a ton. Obama's current plan includes spending more money in one year, than we have spent on the entire Iraq war to date.

    Ok, it's not being paid for.

    The right to earn money without it being confiscated by the government. The right to not fund projects I don't believe in. "To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." -- Thomas Jefferson.

    The tax revenue did not decrease. Further, spending has a vastly larger effect on deficits than revenue ever does.

    For example. If you earn $25K/year and spend $30K, you will have a $5K deficit. The following year, if you get a new job and earn $35K/year, but spend $45K, you will have a $10K deficit. Is the cause of your new higher deficit, the job? Of course not, it's your spending.

    Conversely, if you go from a $35K job to a $30K job, but your spending goes from $40K to $25K, you'll go from a deficit to a $5K surplus. Point being, spending is always the culprit when dealing with deficits and debt. Never the income.

    To the point... Spending has increased on every front. You can't blame a tax cut, that increased revenue for trillions of debt. Nor can you blame $800 billion for Iraq, for causing $4 Trillion in new debt. Clearly there is nearly $3 trillion plus in spending, that wasn't spent on the military, that is now part of our federal debt.
     
  14. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Yes.


    Its a terribly messed up situation. I know plenty will lose thier jobs, but it is the lesser of two evils.
    I do support helping the poor have more opportunity to work thier way out of being poor. Basic assistance is often times necessary to make this a reality.
    No I think I get it quite well. The main difference is that Obama brings a plan to at least pay a small portion of this expenditures through an increase in taxes which is the only way to minimize the impact of the debt.


    I know its not being paid for. That has been a major failure of the GOP from 2000-2006 where they had the majority in Congress and ownership of the WH.
    They didnt do squat to adress the long term fiscal viability, instead they drove it into the ground.


    Tommy Jeff makes an interesting point here, imagine the ability to choose what our tax dollars go for, but there is a problem in the fact that we are spending far more than what we are getting in revenue.
    But in that case, I should be able to reject my tax dollars going to things I dont want them directed towards. Some might want to not have thier dollars spent in welfare for other Americans. Whereas I would rather my tax dollar be maximized here at home.

    Id like to see some actual evidence that revenue did not decrease.
    I would agree with the second sentence for sure. The problem is that the current President does not seem to understand that.

    Again, Id like to see how the tax cut has increased revenue into the trillions.
    Please provide some evidence of this.
    The fact of the matter is that we cannot continue spending in this manner when our revenues dont match. It doesnt work for my checkbook, nor yours, nor the Feds. So we need to do one of two things. Either increase revenues to cover the expenditures, or cut expenditures to meet revenue.
     
  15. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah...you "conservatives" never were big-fans of Historical-precedence. :rolleyes:
     
Loading...

Share This Page