Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

    Originally posted by Andy_M View Post
    Frank said,

    >> "If you are a good and honest, hard working, faithful man, you really need to "Stay the Course" and keep out of politics, it will only compromise you."

    This is one of the very few areas where I disagree with him.

    We The People are being raped because too many of us are politically uninvolved and don't want to join the fray. Being uninvolved is the polictical version of bending over.

    Look at two party elections. The tally is basically similar to a coin flip - a random event with the votes running pretty close to 50-50. The politicians know this very well. That's why they are ONLY devoted to special interests. If you can get more special interests in your column than the other guy can, it swings the otherwise random election. Everything else they do is geared toward staying close to the status quo and not upsetting anyone too much. That's why you can COUNT on nothing much of any real significance ever happening to right this ship. Why do you suppose there STILL haven't been any meaningful changes in regulating the banking industry?

    Why do you suppose the choice for the Dems came down to Hillary or Barack? Hmmm. One appeals to the women special interest, the other appeals to the ethnic special interest. Check out how Black America voted in the election. I Would say the Dems made a good choice from an "election engineering" perspective. Now, why do you suppose McCain selected Palin? He barely knew her, she has nothing, except that she is a member of a special interest group. Not such a great choice though, since between her (dumb) comments and gun-toting views I don't think that women found her all that compelling. We know certainly that McCain didn't have a lot of use for her!! Palin was just another example of poor McCain, who I now think may well have been the better man, running an inept campaign.

    Now before someone accuses me of racism.... I am not racist at all, nor am I anti women (very much the opposite, in fact). The facts are the facts, though, and even if we choose to characterize them as "politically incorrect" that doesn't change them. It just means we aren't seeing things for what they are.
    I'm back from the gym and ready for some more stimulating interaction. Andy, I was really referring to picking a political party and believing they will fix things when they are part of the problem. I'm all for being involved and changing business as usual, but if this last election does not prove that to be an impossibility I don't know what does?
    I didn't vote for Obama because of his race, I was dissatisfied with the current administration. Obama has not delivered on change he promised, we have the same washington politics and all the other things I keep repeating. McCain was going to tax my health benefits, am I better off now? No!!!

    How are we the people supposed to get real change, and exactly what changes do we want? I'll tell you what I want and then we can see how much we have in common. I want businesses and jobs brought back, legislate limits, tariffs, incentives but bring back manufacturing and employ Americans to make what Americans consume.
    Legislate 50% or greater rebates and incentives for alternative energy, NOW! Solar panels, wind turbines, anything that will reduce our consumption of oil.
    Resolve the illegal immigrant situation, amnesty and or deportation for some and then seal our borders. Find out who is in our country once and for all.
    Give women a one time pass on abortion and then if they can't prevent getting pregnant with an unwanted child, mandatory birth control. Free up the healthcare facilities for sick people not irresponsible men and women.
    Surgically castrate sex offenders, not chemically so they can get off their meds and victimize more women and children!
    Force Gays to get married and remain faithful. If it's good enough for me, it's good enough for them. Then let's see how much they like marriage.
    That's it for now, I'm tired and you guys are sick of my rant anyway.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

      Originally posted by Frankiarmz View Post
      I'm back from the gym and ready for some more stimulating interaction.
      Welcome back

      Originally posted by Frankiarmz View Post
      That's it for now, I'm tired and you guys are sick of my rant anyway.

      No No, I learn a lot from you and the others, Its always good to see and read all views no matter how different they may be,

      I like to read and learn from all

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

        Originally posted by PlumbingSkool View Post
        Well actually, ( not aimed at you, but since you gave me an example )

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_conservatism

        Fiscal conservatism is a political term used in North America to describe a fiscal policy that advocates avoiding deficit spending. Fiscal conservatives often consider reduction of overall government spending and national debt as well as balancing the federal budget of paramount importance. Free trade, deregulation of the economy, lower taxes, and other classical liberal policies are also often affiliated with fiscal conservatism.



        Wouldn't "deficit spending" be buying a house more then your worth and not make you a conservative ....Or am I reading this wrong, and if so please forgive me and educate me on what I read wrong if you wouldn't mind,

        Wikipedia confuses me at times ( I never graduated high school ). ;(
        I have a bunch of personal debt, but that is a choice that I have made. Unlike the federal debt, it is all collateralized (house, 2 cars). Also once I bought the house, my network decreased because there was about $25k in taxes, and fees; but if you exclude that my assets increase by the price of the house; which is then offset by the loan amount. So my net worth was reduced; but would still be positive.

        This relates to the "can you live on 19k." The answer is no, but because I've chosen not to. My wife and I work hard, make a good amount of money; and after saving 12% for retirement, putting away a little bit for the kids, and pre-paying our mortgage we spend all of it. I kind of figure that I've earned the money, I might as well enjoy it.

        Relating that back to fiscal conservatism. My belief is that I earn the money I work for, and want to keep it. I want the federal, state, and county governments to do less, so that I can keep more. I am pretty much OK with about 80% of what the town government does, though I wish they would be friendlier to business to increase the assessment rolls. The school district is reasonable, but I wish they would control costs more [teacher salaries/pensions]. I would be willing to give up state, county, and federal services for the ability to keep more of my money.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

          Originally posted by PlumbingSkool View Post
          TRUE STORY

          "Conservative" radio host has a 14 million dollar penthouse for sale....

          HA! If that's conservative .......well - LOL

          Source

          http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/03/real...home/index.htm


          Ah .........Ya, must be nice to be conservative like that and all
          The CON in conservative.
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

            Originally posted by cpw View Post

            Relating that back to fiscal conservatism. My belief is that I earn the money I work for, and want to keep it. I want the federal, state, and county governments to do less, so that I can keep more. I am pretty much OK with about 80% of what the town government does, though I wish they would be friendlier to business to increase the assessment rolls. The school district is reasonable, but I wish they would control costs more [teacher salaries/pensions]. I would be willing to give up state, county, and federal services for the ability to keep more of my money.
            Okay, Thanks for explaining that, I understand much better now. You made that easier to understand then reading wiki , Thanks so much!

            I like keeping my money as well, then again, I do understand that taxes pay for cops , fireman etc.

            But thanks so much for taking the time out to explain, I always learn from these threads

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

              Originally posted by Andy_M View Post
              So that's your registered affiliation. As if that means something? Or does it just give you license to claim you're not biased as you bash the republicans?
              If the dems ran congress with the same degree of partisanship that the repubs did, I would be bashing them too. But the fact of the matter is that the republicans have been on the wrong side of history time after time.

              They cry for bi-partisan approaches now, but where was this attitude when they held the majority and rammed through trillions of dollars of debt without any respect for the minority party? They are hypocrites of the highest order.

              The dems have their share of problems, and no the least of which is the way they are handling members under investigation by the ethics board. But that board is comprised of an equal number from each party so both parties are to blame for not cleaning house.

              The repubs get up there and say how reconciliation has always been a bipartisan matter when they know full and well that is not the case. Matter of fact, it wasn't all that long ago the they were claiming that reconciliation is a legal and perfectly acceptable rule. Remember that whole Up-or-Down vote, majority rule? That wasn't just for judicial nominees. That was also their battle cry for reconciliation. Now they cry foul the majority party uses the same standard.

              The republicans get caught in outright lies on a daily basis, and when they get called on it, as Orin Hatch did recently, they claim it as a badge of honor.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                Originally posted by cpw View Post
                I would be willing to give up state, county, and federal services for the ability to keep more of my money.
                And that's the rub. Getting everyone to agree as to which services to discontinue is that hard part. Everyone wants services and entitlements cut, just don't cut the ones they think they have earned or deserve.

                I don't have any kids, so why should I pay for people that don't know when to stop procreating and filling up the school system? Why should I pay for a couples decision to have more than two children in public school? If you want to have three or more kids, fine by me. You pay for their education.

                Why do couples get a tax credit for having kids? How is that equitable? It should be the other way around. Families generally require more government services that singles or childrenless couples.

                Why should I subsidize others lifestyles or poor decisions? You want kids, you pay for them. That's probably the best birth control around.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                  Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                  And that's the rub. Getting everyone to agree as to which services to discontinue is that hard part. Everyone wants services and entitlements cut, just don't cut the ones they think they have earned or deserve.

                  I don't have any kids, so why should I pay for people that don't know when to stop procreating and filling up the school system? Why should I pay for a couples decision to have more than two children in public school? If you want to have three or more kids, fine by me. You pay for their education.

                  Why do couples get a tax credit for having kids? How is that equitable? It should be the other way around. Families generally require more government services that singles or childrenless couples.

                  Why should I subsidize others lifestyles or poor decisions? You want kids, you pay for them. That's probably the best birth control around.
                  It looks to me like that is conservative talk.
                  Push sticks/blocks Save Fingers
                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                  "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good."
                  attributed to Samuel Johnson
                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                  PUBLIC NOTICE: Due to recent budget cuts, the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil...plus the current state of the economy............the light at the end of the tunnel, has been turned off.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                    Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                    And that's the rub. Getting everyone to agree as to which services to discontinue is that hard part. Everyone wants services and entitlements cut, just don't cut the ones they think they have earned or deserve.

                    I don't have any kids, so why should I pay for people that don't know when to stop procreating and filling up the school system? Why should I pay for a couples decision to have more than two children in public school? If you want to have three or more kids, fine by me. You pay for their education.
                    The $6,000 a year I pay in school taxes works out to $360,000 over the span of 60 years. I could put my two kids in private school for 12 years at $15,000 a year for the same price. Not a bad trade for me personally. This doesn't include the additional 1/3 of the school districts budget that comes from state aid, which of course I pay for as well (27% of the NYS budget is school aid). When you factor that in, I'm paying another several thousand dollars a year; and the deal would move into the private school's favor.

                    Why do couples get a tax credit for having kids? How is that equitable? It should be the other way around. Families generally require more government services that singles or childrenless couples.

                    Why should I subsidize others lifestyles or poor decisions? You want kids, you pay for them. That's probably the best birth control around.
                    I have no problem with people paying for their own kids, but if the kids are part of the family, the additional deduction makes sense, as they are another person and if you are going to have a standard deduction/exemption for people the kids should be entitled to one as well.

                    I don't think refundable tax credits make sense in any case.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                      Originally posted by Frankiarmz View Post
                      I'm back from the gym and ready for some more stimulating interaction. Andy, I was really referring to picking a political party and believing they will fix things when they are part of the problem. I'm all for being involved and changing business as usual, but if this last election does not prove that to be an impossibility I don't know what does?
                      I didn't vote for Obama because of his race, I was dissatisfied with the current administration. Obama has not delivered on change he promised, we have the same washington politics and all the other things I keep repeating. McCain was going to tax my health benefits, am I better off now? No!!!

                      How are we the people supposed to get real change, and exactly what changes do we want? I'll tell you what I want and then we can see how much we have in common. I want businesses and jobs brought back, legislate limits, tariffs, incentives but bring back manufacturing and employ Americans to make what Americans consume.
                      Legislate 50% or greater rebates and incentives for alternative energy, NOW! Solar panels, wind turbines, anything that will reduce our consumption of oil.
                      Resolve the illegal immigrant situation, amnesty and or deportation for some and then seal our borders. Find out who is in our country once and for all.
                      Give women a one time pass on abortion and then if they can't prevent getting pregnant with an unwanted child, mandatory birth control. Free up the healthcare facilities for sick people not irresponsible men and women.
                      Surgically castrate sex offenders, not chemically so they can get off their meds and victimize more women and children!
                      Force Gays to get married and remain faithful. If it's good enough for me, it's good enough for them. Then let's see how much they like marriage.
                      That's it for now, I'm tired and you guys are sick of my rant anyway.
                      Glad to her that you weren't advocating staying away from political issues... many people are politics-averse and that just opens the door for abuses of the kind we've seen. Personally I believe common sense should rule the day. Ufortunately it hasn't even made an appearance for far too long. If something seems wrong or stupid (i.e., the notion of a service economy, deficit spending or banks gone berserk) we need to recognize it as such and - for cryin' out loud - stop drinking the kool-aid.

                      I'm a huge believer in the need for alternate energy, as you might recall. However I DO NOT advocate blanket spending on rebates. I believe that what we need *first* is a coherent, national energy policy. Going into any project without a concrete plan isn't the way to get results. It's very much like the stimulus package that didn't create sustainable job growth, or the bank bailout that didn't fix the problems there. For a project the size of alternate energy, we need a coherent and integrated long term plan, we need to allocate sufficient funds and then target and manage every dollar toward the plan. THis is how private industry gets results and the rules are for success don't care if you're developing a cordless drill or developing renewable domestic energy sources. The "throw money at the problem approach" is a classic problem with government spending programs - there is typically no real plan or accountability in government so the money most often ends up being wasted. Can't afford that. We won the race with Hitler to develop the A-bomb.... Fermi et al had a plan. We put a man on the moon in 9 years... NASA had a plan. The US ejected Saddam from Kuwait in very short order.... Pentagon had a plan. Money is a means to realize a plan... it isn't a substitute for thinking men. There are plenty of people that seize on the lack of a plan to milk personal gain. Again, no plan = open door for those people.

                      We can and should incentivize private industry to do things that *are consistent with the plan* and we can and should incentivize early adoption of technologies that need volume in order to be economically viable. Solar and wind and geothermal and nuclear may well be part of the plan, but I don't advocate the Gov't throwing money at the problem until we know what the plan is. You will get a lot of wheel spinning and some little advances but basically nothing. We don't have time for this sort of approach. Private industry and blind incentives without a plan isn't going to solve the energy problem, but it will succeed in spending the money.

                      As far as gays and abortion and even illegal immigrants.... these are social issues. I don't see gays having much impact on fiscal issues, job growth or deficit spending. It's important to separate fiscal issues from social issues. Personally I don't think that the Government should have one damn thing to say about gays. It's a *great* example of divertting popular attention to emotional issues while others continue the pillaging of America. I don't care about what gays do and they shouldn't care about what I do. The word "force" - as in "Force gays to get married..." should *never* IMO be used in the context of abridging personal freedom in the United States, no matter what your religious or moral beliefs are. One of the (large) problems I have with the religious right wing faction of the republican party is that they want to impose THEIR morality on others. I do believe that as a society we have misplaced our moral compass -- but it is DANGEROUS DANGEROUS DANGEROUS for government to step in and impose morality. I wouldn't mind at all a return to 1960's FCC decency standards being applied to the over-the-top levels of sex that pervade televison today... that's a public media... but the idea that government should have any damn say whatsoever in what people do privately between consenting adults is just plain scary.

                      Castrating sex offenders? I totally share your outrage. But it's just not that simple. Keep in mind that heavy petting between an 18 year old and a 17 year old classifies one as a sex offender. Are you innocent of this? Be honest!! Sure glad I wasn't caught... and if I was, thank God there was no one there wanting to castrate me! I get your point, but it's the grey areas that always make the solutions to social problems - again as opposed to fiscal ones - not quite so clear.

                      This relates to the noiton of conservatism v. liberalism. It again isn't that clear. There's social conservativism/liberalism and fiscal conservatism/liberalism. They do , like everything else, overlap. And the definitions are difficult to pin down because the definitions change over time.

                      Personally my view is that a conservative perpective is one where government should limit its activities to those *necessary* areas that cannnot be effectively addressed by the private sector or the states. This would include national defense and the establishment of uniformity of currency, intrastate trade policy, immigration, foreign trade, international relations, special projects like space exploration (and alternate energy), environemental regulation, etc. Private industry or the individual states can't do these things because they either require a coordinated effort (such as defense) or there is too many diffeernces in terms of interest to make cooperation practical. And at that, the central government's involvement should be the MINIMUM level needed to get results. I do not believe that the Gov't should be involved in social issues and feel that most spending on social programs shouldn't exist at all. Hmmm... isn't that "socialism"? Traditionally, liberalism is considered "left", along with large central government, emphasis on social programs, redistribution of income from the "haves" to the "have-nots", with socialism and , yes, communism considered to be the far left. Where as conservatism is considered to be "right", along with ideas of minimum central government, State's rights, emphasis on personal freedoms, and a primarily laissez-faire capitalism economic bent.

                      Ironically the religious right wingers are allied with the conservatives. As I see it, they are anything but. they want to impose their morality and views on everyone else and so in that sense I find them to be anything but conservative. They also aren't allied with current notions of liberals. What they are, IMO, are a bunch of radicals with little respect for our personal liberty.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                        Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                        If the dems ran congress with the same degree of partisanship that the repubs did, I would be bashing them too. But the fact of the matter is that the republicans have been on the wrong side of history time after time.

                        They cry for bi-partisan approaches now, but where was this attitude when they held the majority and rammed through trillions of dollars of debt without any respect for the minority party? They are hypocrites of the highest order.

                        The dems have their share of problems, and no the least of which is the way they are handling members under investigation by the ethics board. But that board is comprised of an equal number from each party so both parties are to blame for not cleaning house.

                        The repubs get up there and say how reconciliation has always been a bipartisan matter when they know full and well that is not the case. Matter of fact, it wasn't all that long ago the they were claiming that reconciliation is a legal and perfectly acceptable rule. Remember that whole Up-or-Down vote, majority rule? That wasn't just for judicial nominees. That was also their battle cry for reconciliation. Now they cry foul the majority party uses the same standard.

                        The republicans get caught in outright lies on a daily basis, and when they get called on it, as Orin Hatch did recently, they claim it as a badge of honor.
                        Your bias is showing. The dems are every bit as partisan, and just as corrupt as their opponents. Their unwillingness to bridge the gaps is also equally prominent. You're confusing standard political rhetoric with effective leadership. The fact is that neither party is effective nor has either party served the national interest for the past 40 years.

                        The results of the failed performance of both parties makes arguments about "this side said this, but last year they said that" kind of irrelevant.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                          At least Rush used His own 14 Mill. On Mr. Gore, He went from a net of 3 Mill. to 100 mill.
                          in a couple of Years. Can anyone explain where this came from? Maybe a little from Phony carbon credits, AND the estate of ARM AND HAMMER ,His Daddys COMMUNIST Bud, The Man that paid for AL'S education.

                          "YOU CAN'T HANDEL THE TRUTH" Back to work KIDS
                          I can build anything You want , if you draw a picture of it , on the back of a big enough check .

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                            Originally posted by PlumbingSkool View Post



                            Wouldn't "deficit spending" be buying a house more then your worth and not make you a conservative ....Or am I reading this wrong, and if so please forgive me and educate me on what I read wrong if you wouldn't mind,
                            yes that is deficit spending,

                            now here is the rub, IMO and you touched on it, it is one thing to borrow for things with value, and will retain a value or a greater good, it is another thing to borrow for things that have no value other than there original use, (not saying it at times is not necessary), say food or gasoline, once it is gone it is gone, but the payments go on for what seems like for ever,

                            on the house if you did not over buy, and it is with your ability to pay for it, it value will most likely hold for many years, if there is not a bubble other major financial things that enter that market, but in a number of years you have payed down on your house and your now have some thing that may be worth more than you owe on it,

                            the problem is the current debt ran up by both party's, Is now reaching a point where paying the interest will be be a major portion of the reduction of the debt, in other words were nearing a point of No return,

                            if your in a situation with Credit card the financial councilor would say cut up the cards and consolidate the debt,

                            but congress has not been willing to cut the cards up,

                            if it continues, the next point is bankruptcy, now if it personal bankruptcy, besides you and the bank, there is not a major ripple that enters the picture,

                            but if that bankruptcy is a country, then the currency is no longer have a value, the promises that have been made to the people are no longer able to be keep, the economy because money is no more, is reduced down to barter with your neighbors, as there is nothing of shared value to trade,

                            the other thing the Government can do is print money, to cover it debt, when money is printed with our some form of backing, (faith in the government or it ability to pay back with currency that has a value), Inflation takes place, things cost more, simply there is only so much value in some thing, if you double the items that represent the value in some thing, then those items are only worth Half as much, so you have inflation, If the Government starts to print money, (which I think they have), there may be rapid inflation in the economy, which will result in a nother game of catch up between labor and prices,
                            and labor/income will lose, and if it gets total out of control (as in germany post WW2, or in Zimbabwe the last few years of over 1000%)
                            Zimbabwe Rhodesia offers an interesting case study, the most recent study regarding a hyperinflationary economy…
                            During the month of March 2007 the inflation rate in Zaimbabwe was 1730%. To put it another way – When the people of Zimbabwe went to bed on March 1st, a loaf of bread cost $2.00. When they woke up on the first day of April that same loaf of bread cost $36.60.
                            By November of 2008, the annual inflation rate in Zimbabwe was 89.7 Sextrillion Percent! That’s 89.7 followed by 20 zeros. At that rate prices were doubling every 24 hours.
                            Again, this happened in 2008! http://www.examiner.com/x-39732-Chic...-or-1400-Wheat
                            but the simple is the tipping point to major problems is getting very near if the point of no return has all ready been crossed,

                            again deficit spending can be a good thing, if there is return to the investment, but if you borrowing for a vacation, or to gas the car up or to buy a meal in the restaurant, and the only return is the moment, then most likely that is a unwise use of credit, many of the things the Government does has little or no return on it, besides the moment,
                            things in the moment need to be balanced with your current income, because if you can not afford to pay for the vacation or the meal, then most likely you will not be able to pay for it in the future, either, as your all ready spending above your means, or (income), most likely if your not paying off the balance every month.

                            currently there are many programs that are good programs that help people, but what is better giving a person a fish or teaching them to fish?

                            Also the congress over the years, have robbed or "borrowed" from many of the social programs thus there not a self supporting program as they were designed to be, or said they would be, these programs when payed for with borrowed moneys are similar to the vacation or the meal on the credit card, there good for the day but there is not a lasting value to the money spent, it will not bring a return in the future, only an interest payment, these programs need to a self sustaining system, and most all spending needs to be self sustaining, if were going to borrow on a new country wide transit system or power grid, that works and will pay dividends in the future that is some what like the house payment there is some thing giving back in the future,
                            Push sticks/blocks Save Fingers
                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good."
                            attributed to Samuel Johnson
                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            PUBLIC NOTICE: Due to recent budget cuts, the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil...plus the current state of the economy............the light at the end of the tunnel, has been turned off.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                              To add to BHD's excellent post, let me point out that the US Government is just like you or me in that they need cash to operate. He is right, they are currently printing money. In fact, when you hear that the Federal Reserve is 'increasing the money supply' that is exactly what they are doing. This is extremely scary because the Federal Reserve NOT FULLY A GOVERNMENT AGENCY! So here, one of the primary and arguably single MOST important function of the Government is, actually controlled by a group that is compriosed of private bankers - INCLUDING FOREIGN INTERESTS - with ties to the Treasury Department but not actually under full control of Uncle Sugar. Madness!

                              Also, right now by far the largest financier of US debt is Red China. They are, if you will, holding the mortgage on the United States Government. So think about this for a second. THese people STILL have ballistic missiles pointed at you. So why are they financing our government spending? The main reason is that they *need* the United States!! We are in fact financing their incredible industrial growth. The amazing growth of the Chinese economy is overwhelmingly due to American consumers buying all their stuff!! It is in their best interest to prop us up so that we can continue. For the time being, that is. There will come a day when they no longer need us. Better brush up on your Mandarin.

                              It's also true that the Chinese are quite afraid of inflation in the U.S., for a simple reason. We owe them a lot of money. As BHD points out, inflation means that our currency becomes worth less. Which means, if you're China, that the actual value of the 'mortgage' they hold becomes worth less. This is one of the reasons that they are starting to make a lot of noise about slowing down their financing of US Government debt. But clearly they need to do what they can to keep us healthy... not to help the Government, but so that you can go to WalMart abnd get more Chinese stuff. It's a bit of a conflict for them.

                              Imagine what would happen if they stopped financing the debt tomorrow! Many other nations in the world consider financing US debt to be a bad risk already, so we would be, essentially, out of business.

                              Don't think it can happen? THink back a few years. This is more or less what happened to the number two superpower in the world. The Soviets did not have an idealogical watershed and decide one day that Marx was a crackpot. They simply went out of business. And we're heading there, too.

                              Sadly, the yogurt is so deep at this point that fiscal restraint is not the answer. In fact, it will likely finish us off. We need to spend like mad to get out of this mess. But not on stupid stimulus packages, inane healthcare proposals, or bailing out the bank fat-cats. We need to spend on those high return activities BHD mentioned. The spending needs to develop alternate energy, new technology, revitalize industry. THere is a difference between spending money which, as BHD said, garners a benefit in the moment as compared to spending that will generate an increase in the Government's revenue stream (if the economy grows so does the tax revenue!) sustainably into the future.

                              Unfortunately we have two political parties and neither has a plan. They both want to give the money away, but you aren't hearing much about anything that will really get us out of this. Don't get me wrong I'm not happy with the state of health care, but the government is spending all it's time on this and topical nonsense like gays in the military.... again, they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
                              Last edited by Andy_M; 03-04-2010, 07:48 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: If My House Was Worth 14 MILLION ...would I be a "Conservative"???

                                deleted-double post
                                Last edited by Andy_M; 03-04-2010, 08:03 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X