Democrats versus Republicans

[erps]

So Craig, I've lost track of what your postion is. First you were saying that debt destroys nations, or maybe it was only war debt, and then when I indicated that there were a lot of folks in the tea party protests that shared your concern, you changed your tune.

As to cuts, if I were the boss, I'd start by getting the federal government out of the business of funding stuff that should be left up to the states. I'd also start slashing budgets by X percent across the board and I'd institute some sort of a rewards program that leads to cutting waste.

By the way, you obviously care a great deal about ending the war on terror. I googled "war protest" news, as your post made me realize that I hadn't seen Cindy Sheehan and her bunch in the news for a while. There was only one news story on the first page of hits about American War protests, and that was to say that the protests were ending because of the new administration and reductions of service members in Iraq. So, I guess it's okay now that it's Obama's war?

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/kennew...ry/574169.html

[erps]

You know and I know that chart would have looked very similar if McCain won or if even Ron Paul or Ralph Nader won. You cannot stop a speeding train.

I don't know how bad it would have been under McCain. As to stopping a speeding train, it appears that Obama's foot isn't on the brake, it's on the gas.

[wind_magic]

Craigimass,

You keep saying that you do not believe that the tea party protesters are upset about the war spending, that they only just now found "religion" - yet I am probably the only actual tea party protester you have been directly exposed to, and I have already provided you with old posts I have made on this forum complaining about the Iraq war spending. Do you personally know tea party protesters you have not yet mentioned who were excited about spending all that money on the war ? Or are you just trying to reach for a conclusion and using whatever hand waving you need to use to prove whatever point it is you are trying to make ?

I would be happy to show you multiple posts on this forum expressing my very serious concern about the debt that the Bush administration was running up if you would like to read them.

[wind_magic]

Craigimass,

Here is one of a number of posts in which I mentioned my unhappiness with the Bush administration spending money they didn't have - this post was talking about the debt bubble and the reversal of the $us to weakness at 300$us/oz gold. This post was from March of 2008, but I can do some searches and find older material if you aren't convinced.

For context - what we were talking about at the time this post was made was the Bush administrations insistence on using debt to pay for the war and how that had caused gold to reverse from 300$us/oz and head for the heavens. Of course it has never come back down since then, because everyone knew when we started paying for the war with debt that it was going to be one more step towards currency devaluation.

Originally Posted by wind_magic

[...]

Then 9/11 2001 and a promise by an American President to fight a war AND not raise taxes ...



Can anyone find 9/11 2001 on this chart ?

You know at least one tea party protester (I'd almost bet the only one you have any direct experience with) who has been complaining since the Iraq war began about the Bush administration spending money on a war without raising taxes to pay for it. Unless you know more protesters who have the opposite point of view I'd appreciate it if you would reconsider the argument you keep trying to make and give the tea party protesters the benefit of the doubt until you find some actual evidence to the contrary.

[erps]

Hey Windy,

As a tea protester, are you only upset about war spending, or does the recent trend in record spending concern too?

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by erps

Hey Windy,

As a tea protester, are you only upset about war spending, or does the recent trend in record spending concern too?

That question must be rhetorical.

Of course I'm incredibly concerned about the money we are spending now, and the money we are committing to spend later. As I have said in previous posts, it is like the Republicans and Democrats are racing against each other to see who can screw the currency up the fastest - just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, that we couldn't have any higher deficits, along comes Obama and our current Congress. As if adding to the deficit weren't bad enough, now we have moved on to multiplication, what's next, exponents ?

[erps]

Just thought I would get it from the horse's mouth, as recent history indicates that someone else will be speaking for you very soon.

[OsmundL]

Originally Posted by erps

Hey Windy, As a tea protester, are you only upset about war spending, or does the recent trend in record spending concern too?

Out of curiosity: Could someone define "spending" here? I am not buying into any of the arguments, it just seems unclear what is talked about.

There has been spending on expanded government activity to fight recession, but also a great deal of investment, i.e. shares taken in banks and business, loans etc., all of which intended to be refunded/returned in some form?

The spending on war has also been a combination of money driving US manufacturers, wages for soldiers, and building Iraq infrastructure.

All these have vastly varying impacts on the economy now and future; so how do the figures distribute across various purposes?

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by OsmundL

Out of curiosity: Could someone define "spending" here? I am not buying into any of the arguments, it just seems unclear what is talked about.

There has been spending on expanded government activity to fight recession, but also a great deal of investment, i.e. shares taken in banks and business, loans etc., all of which intended to be refunded/returned in some form?

The spending on war has also been a combination of money driving US manufacturers, wages for soldiers, and building Iraq infrastructure.

All these have vastly varying impacts on the economy now and future; so how do the figures distribute across various purposes?

OsmundL,

I think we can skip right past the argument you are getting ready to make about good spending vs. bad spending and get right to the point - is devaluing the currency actually going to fix anything ? Spending, in all of its forms right now, is simply an attempt to re-inflate the currency and stop the deflation. The proof is obvious enough, they are doing quantitative easing by (in the United States) buying Treasuries using money created by the Fed (something we wrote about here months before they even announced it), and there is only one reason to ever attempt such madness.

Here is a post I made before our current President was even elected, I wonder if we knew what he was going to do before he even knew, I say that because it seemed to take him a few months in office to figure out where all the buttons were.

Originally Posted by wind_magic

I think they could decide to print a lot more money. I don't mean this in a partisan political way, but if Obama wins he is no doubt going to be under a lot of pressure from Democrats to pull out the FDR Depression era play book, and that means printing money. We also already have a huge number of unfunded mandates such as the recent increases in FDIC insurance, the government essentially buying mortgages, etc, and all of those are things that the government won't be able to undo now that they have done them - just because you don't actually print the money doesn't mean that it isn't created, because it is still promised. This 700B$us bailout alone could turn into 2T$us very easily, the government has essentially agreed to print cash and swap it for burning paper. And lets not forget the national debt just sitting there begging to be monetized.

I think the best case for a real problem with currency devaluation is that it is so easy a choice right now, and Americans love easy. Printing kills a lot of birds with one stone - it takes savings away from a HUGE retirement class and forces them to work longer, it increases exports at a time when business might start to struggle, it allows the powers-that-be to push pretty buttons, and we all know how much they love to push pretty buttons, etc. Besides, who owns all of the government debt and why should the American public care if those bond holders get screwed, is the American public really going to shed a tear for the Chinese ? Printing currency is a beautiful siren singing .. if we have lots of deflation then the more money you print, the better things seem to get, and printing money at least for a while doesn't SEEM to have any downside. Printing money is the path of least resistance, because the hard way is to let folks suffer a while and increase productivity and work their way out of debt. The American public doesn't seem too big on working it's way out of debt, and I don't think the U.S. government is up for it either. The board just seems to be set for the obvious next move ...

[sailaway21]

hehe!
To get the credit card industry regulations they wanted, the Dem's had to agree to allow concealed weapons to be carried in national parks. They had to do it just to get Dem votes, too! Your NRA dollars at work. Things are never as bleak as they seem.