What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The table gets smaller...

Military Bands.

That's been my beef with many so called conservatives for years. They are all about cutting government...that is until its something they want. Then the are opposed. In the end, they're like everyone else by wanting to cut other peoples stuff while funding their own. The difference is that while others fail to do something they campaigned on...often conservatives lie on the campaign trail by design. And the worst part about it...that the things they want to protect are those that add the least amount of value to society.

Sorry...but when I see the deficit is wildly out of control, stuff like failing to cut wasteful spending gets to me.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Meanwhile, some GOP Congressmen are talking about impeaching Obama <del>because he's a Democrat</del> if he uses the 14th Amendment to void the debt ceiling.

So if the president uses the Constitution to prevent the US from defaulting on its debt, they'll impeach him.

Remind me again why I shouldn't be cynical about the desires of the GOP to get a deal.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Military Bands.

That's been my beef with many so called conservatives for years. They are all about cutting government...that is until its something they want. Then the are opposed. In the end, they're like everyone else by wanting to cut other peoples stuff while funding their own. The difference is that while others fail to do something they campaigned on...often conservatives lie on the campaign trail by design. And the worst part about it...that the things they want to protect are those that add the least amount of value to society.

Sorry...but when I see the deficit is wildly out of control, stuff like failing to cut wasteful spending gets to me.

And the biggest thing you could think of was military bands? We've probably been funding that since 1790. How about the stimulus money spent on Operation Gunwalker? Not only did it waste money, but it got Americans murdered. There are thousands of plain ol' wastes. I mean, how much we spending on "green tech" that will eventually be stolen by the Chinese? But really a lot of the extras don't matter compared to the big ones... entitlement spending and the great society.

----

Interesting we see the "radicalization of the right".... does anybody have any concept of what kinds of spending we've normalized, that is made to consider normal... that adopting 2008 spending schemes is considered radical? That we still have people pressing for free healthcare and free education? Its been the same thing with the dems... they'll stake a position that is further out and then claim that you should compromise to their middle. And then they get upset when the conservatives start to think "woah buddy, other way around... you don't play fair with us, we won't play fair with you"... but no, its only those stupid low-info cons who have to be brought to heel. The high-information people who ignore harmful data are good to go.

Again, its always funny to see the party of dreamers claim the high-ground on intellectualism when they foster ideologies which advance dreams over realities. The party of the artists, actors, spiritualists, and the painfully-low-info-but-they-care-dammit types. Really? You think I care about the droolers on the right? They aren't the ones who occupy the seat of power under any administration. They aren't the ones that took us to the brink. They aren't the ones that are leading us to become Greece.

I think this comment pretty much captures my feelings on things:

You're an engineer... tell me how this all plays out if we increase the debt ceiling without serious and significant concessions on spending? Yes, its a game of chicken right now... but you know what... either one can blink... but only one is supposed to out of moral goodness? That it would just be unfair otherwise? Tell me, why do those evil low-info Republicans have to blink first? Why is it imperative that the dems don't? I find it interesting that all these high-info people have put us into a place where we need to consider the debt-ceiling so much. Surely their intelligence could have had the foresight to avoid this day?

----

Bottom line... its spending that got us today... and the only thing we've said with any clarity... is that we don't have any intention to stop spending as we'd be denied the great things we've convinced ourselves we can provide. Of course doing so will put us into a debt hole and make us generally worthless. We'll have to provide less or else we won't be able to provide to begin with (but you haven't thought about that, have you). But you know, as long as feel good about lying to ourselves and as long as we blame the right people (you know, the stupid people) things will turn out fine. Afterall, its America... things magically work 'cause we woke up this morning dontcha know.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bottom line is- if you are bankrupt with large debt as an individual you cannot just stop spending to catch up and pay off your debt. You need to also find a way to increase your income to pay it off.

Bottom line is- no matter what your opinion of who is to blame (chicken or egg) the above truth is reality. Whining about how stimulus pkgs caused it is useless. Dismissing savings, no matter how small or how long the expenditure is silly. If I got my fingernails done every week since I got married for 30$ and then I went bankrupt surely no one would think that was an appropriate cost if I was trying to pay off debt. Them telling me it was all my fault because of my fingernails would also be silly. Dismissing something because it is small is not logical. That is like the people who throw away pennies. My kid ate lunch with another kid who got a dime back from lunch money every day. The kid didn't want to carry it around and gave it to my kid. Work out how many $ he got by the end of the yr because a dime was too small to carry.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bottom line... its spending that got us today...

Combined with tax cuts in the middle of two unfunded wars.

When even the farking Economist, which is as economically conservative as they come (at least among sane people), is putting the blame on the Republicans, then you know they're farked up.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Endlessly repeating the same talking point works great on centrally-controlled talk radio where the host controls the dialog and cuts off anyone who moves off the script. In the free marketplace of ideas -- not so much. :)

There is no way to pry people from their faith, and if anybody still believes in supply side after 30 years of unrelenting failure, that's a helluva faith. Best just to move on and save the ones you can.

Austrian economics and Keynesian economics are both obsolete solutions from a time where national economies had a completely different structure. Future solutions are located just there -- in the future. Continuing these 50-year old arguments is the equivalent of passionately arguing whether 18th century Mercantilist policies should be adopted.

Never trust any economic policy under 30.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Interesting we see the "radicalization of the right".... does anybody have any concept of what kinds of spending we've normalized, that is made to consider normal... that adopting 2008 spending schemes is considered radical? That we still have people pressing for free healthcare and free education? Its been the same thing with the dems... they'll stake a position that is further out and then claim that you should compromise to their middle. And then they get upset when the conservatives start to think "woah buddy, other way around... you don't play fair with us, we won't play fair with you"... but no, its only those stupid low-info cons who have to be brought to heel. The high-information people who ignore harmful data are good to go.

You're an engineer... tell me how this all plays out if we increase the debt ceiling without serious and significant concessions on spending? Yes, its a game of chicken right now... but you know what... either one can blink... but only one is supposed to out of moral goodness? That it would just be unfair otherwise? Tell me, why do those evil low-info Republicans have to blink first? Why is it imperative that the dems don't? I find it interesting that all these high-info people have put us into a place where we need to consider the debt-ceiling so much. Surely their intelligence could have had the foresight to avoid this day?

----

Bottom line... its spending that got us today... and the only thing we've said with any clarity... is that we don't have any intention to stop spending as we'd be denied the great things we've convinced ourselves we can provide. Of course doing so will put us into a debt hole and make us generally worthless. We'll have to provide less or else we won't be able to provide to begin with (but you haven't thought about that, have you). But you know, as long as feel good about lying to ourselves and as long as we blame the right people (you know, the stupid people) things will turn out fine. Afterall, its America... things magically work 'cause we woke up this morning dontcha know.

I've said all along, increase tax revenues to the average levels of 19 to 20% of GDP and cut spending to match revenue. I fail to see how that is a radical solution, certantly less radical than spending cuts alone (which many republicans have proclamed) or tax increases alone (which I don't think ANYONE has put forth as a solution).

Never trust any economic policy under 30.

Under 30 or over 30?
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Austrian economics and Keynesian economics are both obsolete solutions from a time where national economies had a completely different structure. Future solutions are located just there -- in the future. Continuing these 50-year old arguments is the equivalent of passionately arguing whether 18th century Mercantilist policies should be adopted.

Never trust any economic policy under 30.
Keynesian economics may have been discredited because it couldn't account for the stagflation of the 70s, but it's still being followed to a degree by most major governments today (spend your way out of a recession/depression). I can understand why modern governments don't like Austrian economics. The Austrian economists are proponents of a hard money standard. Governments like fiat money which they can print (create) to their hearts desire and control (via inflation) through Central banks. Hard money standards limit governments control of inflation/power/spending.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Under 30 or over 30?

Under 30. Policies have to adjust to new realities. Theories are timeless, but they manifest differently with different contexts. Unionization was a great way to build the middle class during the industrial age; today, not so much. Tax revolts made sense when the level of taxation was high. Now, with taxes lower than they've been in fifty years, they're as dumb as removing the brakes from your car.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Just in case anyone was wondering, the jobless numbers today actually are a bit misleading. 18000 net job growth is tiny, but much of it is a result of government jobs being cut by 39,000. The private sector added 57,000. And no, despite news sites attempts at saying there's a possibility of a double dip, macroeconomic indicators are pointing towards a period of slower growth in the economy, not negative growth.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Under 30. Policies have to adjust to new realities. Theories are timeless, but they manifest differently with different contexts. Unionization was a great way to build the middle class during the industrial age; today, not so much. Tax revolts made sense when the level of taxation was high. Now, with taxes lower than they've been in fifty years, they're as dumb as removing the brakes from your car.

So should it be to never trust any economic policy OVER 30? As only those under 30 are able adjust for the changing conditions? Or am I reading that wrong?
 
The Bush tax cuts in the mid 2000s did well in fostering growth, however, extension of tax cuts are moronic. Tax policy needs to reflect quality of life. When our tax rates were high in the 50s and 60s it was seen as collective progress. Lowering corporate taxes help improve infrastructures, not add jobs. Salaries are a small drop in the bucket compared to the high cost of updating machinery, computers, and efficiency gains. Improving the marginal product of workers is what costs so much.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

So should it be to never trust any economic policy OVER 30? As only those under 30 are able adjust for the changing conditions? Or am I reading that wrong?

I dunno if you're reading it wrong, but you're confusing the hell out of me. It's that policies have an expiration date. It doesn't matter if you're 24 or 64, if you still believe in FDR or Reagan economic policies, you're praying to obsolete Gods. Young people are far more likely to come up with the next relevant ideas because they have no skin in the game yet, but that's not what I was driving at.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I dunno if you're reading it wrong, but you're confusing the hell out of me. It's that policies have an expiration date. It doesn't matter if you're 24 or 64, if you still believe in FDR or Reagan economic policies, you're praying to obsolete Gods. Young people are far more likely to come up with the next relevant ideas because they have no skin in the game yet, but that's not what I was driving at.

You said: No one should trust an economic policy UNDER 30

but what you have written makes it seem like what you should have said is that no one should follow an economic policy OVER 30.

Sorry that I wasn't clear.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

You said: No one should trust an economic policy UNDER 30

but what you have written makes it seem like what you should have said is that no one should follow an economic policy OVER 30.

Sorry that I wasn't clear.

No, it was me. I read your response three times and somehow it still didn't click, but now it does -- you are correct. The Times regrets the error.
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

And the biggest thing you could think of was military bands?

So we don't cut it? I thought we were going through the budget to find opportunities to cut spending. This isn't one of those opportunities to cut?
 
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

So we don't cut it? I thought we were going through the budget to find opportunities to cut spending. This isn't one of those opportunities to cut?

Heck no. We have to increase the defense budget again.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4368828.../house-boosts-military-budget-time-austerity/

Shared sacrifice for everyone. Except the rich and defense contractors. And yes, I see that it passed with bi-partisan support, which basically means now that Social Security is no longer the 3rd rail of American politics. A bloated military that spends half the world's money is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top