Digital Doctor
Well-known member
The comparisons are so unfair it's unreasonable to make those comparisons.
Apples and Oranges.
The Demise of the United States is Inevitable
- Thread starter Fred Sherman
- Start date
- Status
Apples and Oranges.
John
Well-known member
What is unfair about facts?
el canadiano
Active member
Nothing? Canada was the first country in the G7 to get back to pre-recession employment levels and was second (in the G7) to Germany in GDP growth. Of course, however, the growth by both Germany and Canada will certainly be hampered by what's been going on in the United States.
Only problem is that prices are (unfortunately) very sticky downward. A litre of gasoline in Canada, for example was around $1.25/L in 2007 when oil was $130/barrel or whatever it was. The prices rose back to that level with oil being $100/barrel.
I like Buffett. Unlike most of the members in Congress, he's one of those people who are not just full of government rhetoric and talk. He wants Congress to get stuff actually done. Guy knows what he's saying.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
That is such a cop out. Common wisdom? How about common sense? My daughter is a college junior. When this nightmare began, I was taking her to orientation on campus two weeks before her freshman year began. I told her then what I will tell you know. It is the height of stupidity and a purely Washington kind of logic to think you can deficit spend your way out of a debt crisis.
If you think option 1 is a win scenario, firmly grasp your ears and pull hard. Continue to do that until you hear a sucking and popping noise.
Peggy
in memoriam 2016
I agree with you on cutting everything except for SS and Medicare. Our elderly have already paid their fair share. Leave them alone.
Carlos
Well-known member
I don't feel that its his fault, he's carrying over Bush's debt, so that really adds up.
The 2 wars that's going on right now was not something he started, rather, something that Mr. Bush started, and put the weight on Obama's shoulders.
From the first day that Obama became president - he has been very adverse to war.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
They've also spent their fair share and thats a reality we need to come to grips with.
Since 1968, there has been no Social Security Trust Fund. It was made part of the general fund and the trust fund was spent. That money they paid in thinking they would get it back later has already been given back to them in the form of other government programs. The government they elected in 1968 did that. I had no say in it. I was far too young to vote then.
But because of their bad decisions and an unreasonable expectation, I have to retire at 70 so that they can retire at 65? Sorry, but no. This is their mess and they have to accept the consequences, not push it off on the next generation.
The mess of today is MY mess and I want to solve it and make the sacrifices I need to make to keep it off my children's back. Programs I care about are going to be cut too, but it has to be done.
This cannot be an emotional decision. It has to be a rational, financially responsible, pull-no-punches solution or the United States of America will not exist much longer. They aren't passing their bill to me, and I'm not passing mine on either. They time to pay the piper is now or never.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
Obama is no more adverse to war that Bush, Clinton or Bush Sr. Every President Since Reagan has used military action of one type or another. Ironically, Reagan was the one with the most restraint.
I was an Air Force Pararescueman (AKA PJ) for many years during the 80s and 90s. And I can tell you for a stone cold fact that the US government is involved in things all over the globe that you never hear about.
As George Orwell rightly observed, "Men sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand readyto do violence on their behalf."
Carlos
Well-known member
Bush [II] invaded Iraq on his own authority. We wouldn't have the 9/11 attacks on the world trade center if Bush had just kept his big mouth shut.
I have not heard about any of the political stuff until that day happened. That whole thing blew up in my face, that I occasionally watch the news, look into the internet news websites... and so on.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
You are so misinformed that I really don't know where to start.
Peggy
in memoriam 2016
THAT is the biggest bunch of BS I've read here yet. Al Qaida was active against the US long before Bush came along. Think USS Cole, the US embassy bombings and the previous WTC bombing.
Dubya had his faults, no denying that. But you can't blame him for stuff that was in the works before he came along, and what happened on 9/11 was most definitely in the works before he took office.
Digital Doctor
Well-known member
Somehow the world over had the same idea.
Obama did the safe political move.
As soon as I heard about governments spending money for "stimulus" I immediately said it wasn't going to work. And it didn't.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
Sure. They had the same idea in Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal. Does anyone notice these ideas come from the quasi-Socialist West while Eastern Europe takes a far more pragmatic financial approach?
Carlos
Well-known member
Humor me then! I mean, it's no coincidence that the 9/11 attacks took place on the very same year that he was sworn in as the 43rd president of United States. Yeah. I'm mis-informed.
A lot of people called the invasion of Iraq "un-justified" because we went in - WE as a collective country went in and invaded their homeland. And not Mr. Bin Laden's Homeland - Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan was merely a side mission. Barely even a target of these attacks. Yeah, I'm mis-informed.
Likewise a lot of people state that Bush's motivation for invading Iraq was based on "finishing what his father didn't accomplish." And at one point I remember him admitting so. Its not even a coincidence that Bush 1's gulf war was against Saddam Hussein's regime, condemning his invasion on oil factory in southern Middle East. Yeah, I'm mis-informed.
Carlos - the mis-informed, and stupid person, says xenForo community.
Forsaken
Well-known member
The attacks were planned at least 1-2 years before Bush took office, therefore making it impossible for them to know that Bush was the future president.
They were also currently attacking US embassies and US interests before the attack, again, making it moot that Bush was the president when the attack took place.
jasetaro
Well-known member
I'm not sure it's the "common wisdom", it's definitely the Keynesian wisdom though and it's the typical playbook of democrats... Look there's an argument to be made for targeted spending on infrastructure projects coupled targeted tax cuts and/or credits to spur economic activity and job creation in the private sector. The problem with President Obama's stimulus package is that spent to much money on the wrong things and expanded the public sector to much... I want to be perfectly clear about this: The President's stimulus package did have an effect, just look at the GDP numbers for the last quarter 2009 and the first half of 2010. Unfortunately, it just didn't have sustained effect, GDP growth has been declining since the second half of 2010.
As an aside don't start celebrating today's jobs report, while 9.1% sounds good the devil is in the details... the labor force participation rate is at its lowest level since July 1983:
- Status