Quote: (10-07-2013 10:06 AM)klosck Wrote:
The truth of the matter is, (and the much larger issue) is that it can’t be passed because we are broke, broke, broke….
This assertion that “we are broke, broke, broke” is so much a fiction that has been created. As soon as we see a new war that we “have to” fight, money magically comes up for that, and those kinds of war endeavors can cost billions or trillions of dollars. Surely, some of those wars can be justified as necessary, and even beneficial in many ways.
I don’t disagree with Samseau’s later post that WWII was central in moving the USA economy in the 40s and 50s; however, to only attribute WWII spending as the solution to USA economic woes and prosperity is oversimplification of many dynamics in order to attempt to denigrate and negate FDR policies. Maybe in the end, FDR policies is not the solution to gaming or even a man’s ability to be a man in society, but to negate its impact on wealth and prosperity in America is merely skewed thinking.
On the other hand, if there is some demand for social spending (such as Obamacare) that is pretty much self-funded – at least shifts around already existing costs rather than creating new costs, there are a multitude of claims that we cannot afford it. The “we are broke, broke, broke” claim is a fictitious creation in order to NOT spend money on social and welfare programs, and this fiction is created in order to falsely justify that we need to go into austerity in order to solve supposed financial problems.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:
……. there are 3 types:
-Alarmists. Chicken little. Sorry, but you'll be the first to go.
-Preservationists. People with a stake in the game, something to lose, who are reluctant to adapt to an upcoming change or shift.
-Opportunists. People who follow trends, formulate potential outcomes, and adapt in anticipation to yield the maximum reward possible.
I look at everything through lens number 3 for obvious reasons. I don't like thinking in terms of "Crashes", why? Because someone got rich off of it! In every single high and low throughout economic history, someone got rich off of it.
I think that these are decent categories for considering issues, but in the end, we all have somewhat of a stake in the outcome of the role of govt in the US – but to varying degrees.
I do appreciate your description of the opportunist, because as guys generally who are interested in gaming girls, each of us is an opportunist to some extent. We attempt to calculate our environment in order to obtain the best advantage out of that, and our actions will depend upon the extent to which we are already invested in certain directions and our resources and assets in certain directions. These assets and resources that we have at our disposal will affect our strategy in game and in other areas of life and even the view of the stake that we have in the system.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:
If you've got everything tied up in dividend-yielding assets and retirement accounts, yeah, life will probably suck for you, and bad.
But if you're sitting on a pile of cash, you are STOKED!
Regular people may not have the ability to hedge too much in their investments; however, after several years of being in the job market (20 years or so), a guy will likely have accumulated assets in real estate, the stock market and cash, and yes, these ratios will vary depending on life choices.
Even a guy who is sitting on a pile of cash, has a lot to lose if the US Govt and economic system tanks, and the dollar tanks, especially if the guy plans to travel or to benefit from imports. In those situations of travel and importing goods for consumption, a guy is greatly advantaged by a strong dollar and confidence in the US govt and economy. On the other hand, if the guy is an exporter and does not plan to travel then he is gonna do better with a weak dollar…. And if the guy is in his early 20s and frustrated because he cannot get a decent job because of various two tiered systems in place in which he is receiving less than 1/3 the wages of baby boomers, then yes, these guys are gonna be frustrated and want to overturn this whole system because they perceive that they are being negatively affected by it.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:
So we're budgeted at a defecit. Great. Does anyone REALLY think that the U.S. will default? We still have, by FAR, the highest GDP in the world. So if our GDP/debt ratio is that far off the cliff, obviously there are austerity measures which can take place, which some people think will tank the market.
Definitely TheDude you are correct about the historical existence of a lot of debt in the US system over time, and that debt has always been a part of the way that the US govt has operated. These days, the US government is looked at as such a secure debt that it can borrow at nearly 0% interest; accordingly, it costs nearly nothing to fund the debt…. even when extra trillions are borrowed or printed. Surely this 0% interest and continued confidence in the USA cannot go on forever, and that is what scares a lot of people, including the very wealthy who want to continue to suck money out of the system, while it still exists. At this time, the US can continue to borrow money and to spend on whatever it wants so long as the US continues to inspire credit confidence. If you screw up that credit confidence, then the USA has to start paying interest, just like everybody else in the world does. In that regard, the chickens will have come home to roost.. and that would not be as good, if it were to occur.
A false assertion is that Austerity is the solution these problems of debt… well debt is not the problem and austerity is not the solution. One solution is to inspire and maintain confidence in the US govt and economic system, and I am not so optimistic as you that this confidence is a given that we can take for granted about it continuing……..surely, for me, I would like the dollar to remain strong for another 30-40 years – so I can travel the world; however, for guys who do not have any dollars.. then they can travel the world and earn foreign currency.
Now, if creating conflicts and the appearances of crises is ultimately a back door mechanism in keeping and maintaining USA credit confidence, I AM ALL FOR IT, but I believe the real goal, in the current situation, is not the creation of USA credit confidence, but rather a vehicle for the wealthy to attempt to steal a little bit more from the American people because they are of the belief that the SHIP IS GOING DOWN, and they WANT TO GET A LITTLE MORE TO TAKE ON THEIR LIFE RAFT WITH THEM BEFORE THE SHIP GOES DOWN.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:
As we can see, we can easily cut 800,000 govt jobs and NOTHING HAPPENS. I would guess you can cut 2-3x that amount and NOTHING HAPPENS.
True, in the short term nothing appears to have happened, and the balancing of the damage is precarious. We are on a sort of house of cards.
I don’t necessarily disagree with a goal to shrink govt, but THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF A PLAN for such, rather than just outright cutting the govt by 40% by shutting down that portion of the govt. There is a lot of input into the economy and systems that are built around the existence of the 40% of the govt that currently is shut down. Accordingly, we cannot just shut off those various systems abruptly without major negative consequences.. including a major negative consequence in which the rest of the world loses confidence in the US’s ability to organize and to govern itself.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:
If you were a banker, who is your best client? The one with the biggest salary and most assets. That's us. The GDP:debt is irrelevant. That's like a banker chastising his client for hitting the strip club too often. It's irrelevant.
There is no crisis. This situation could get turned around in a matter of years with some austerity measures and restructuring of the job market. But that will only happen when a very select few, very powerful people WANT it to happen.
I agree with you totally, here, except I BELIEVE THAT AUSTERITY IS NOT THE SOLUTION; however, you may be correct that some kind of restructuring may be in order. And, in that regard, I am of the opinion that planned restructuring needs to be ordered in order to maintain confidence in the US dominated system.
Quote: (10-07-2013 12:28 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:
According to former Congressman Pete Stark (the only one who had the balls to openly admit he was an Atheist while in office), the larger the national debt, the wealthier we are. Other nations still view the US government as a creditworthy borrower.
This video appears to have been shot during the Bush era, and a funny thing about this video is that Republican Pete Stark is pretty much arguing that debt is not a problem because he likes the way that the Republicans are using that debt to bring benefits to the American people. However, once the Democrats are in charge, the Republicans change their tunes, and begin to say that debt is a major problem. They do this in order to attempt to get concessions from democrats to buy into austerity measures and to attempt to cut social programs… and frequently the democrats go along with this mythical austerity framework.
I think that even though Stark is being a bit of a jerk in this video, he is ultimately correct in what he is saying, and Jan Helfeld is asking stupid ass and annoying questions – possibly because Helfeld is not adequately prepared.. or maybe he is purposefully trying to annoy Stark. In the end, Stark declares the interview is over and tells Helfeld to get the fuck out of his office.. .that is hilarious.