¿Economic Armageddon? Doesn't have To Be This Way, 7 Things You Can Do To Stop It.

reply to post by poet1b


Either you are having a reading comprehension issue, or you are twisting what I am saying so you can validate your own argument, I don't know which it is. Either way, half your post

you
"Businesses (more accurately crooks) will always seek to cheat the system through corruption, whether or not government is involved. Business will always seek to corrupt government, whether or not government works to keep corruption in business in check."

me
"Business will always look for the path of least resistance and most profit. They will influence government policy, they will try to get people evicted, they will do whatever they think will benefit them most. That is what I expect a business to do, and that's is what everyone should expect...

I said it should be expected that killers will kill and that business will cheat and corrupt, EVEN IF GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED."

How is what I said any different?

you
"There will always be corruption in business and in government. When the people don't vote for politicians who aim to make government work to eliminate corruption in business as much as is possible, Then corruption in business, and in government, gets far worse."

me
"I expect a murderer to murder, but that doesn't mean I'll sit around idle while he does it. If we don't hold government accountable, then government will not hold big business accountable...

Between the two, IT SHOULD BE EXPECTED, that government will give into corruption if left unchecked by the people. That is exactly what has happened."

again, how is what I said any different?

Are you even reading my posts or just putting my name in your posts then making counter-arguments to an argument I'm not even making?

And as far as business involvement in government. If government had no involvement in business affairs, how would it be profitable to corrupt government. If they don't have anything to do with you, why would you corrupt them? There is no profit to be made if government never outsourced work to an outside business.

For you to blame Obama for the huge deficits he inherited from GW is ludicrous. All these repub mouth pieces making this claim are only succeeding in making themselves look like fools.

LOL yeah, it has nothing to do with all the programs he's creating or anything. You are so passionate about hating bush and so quick to defend obama that you can't see straight, which is too bad since it isn't like you are misinformed.

With good leadership working to reduce corruption in business as much as possible, and some technological innovations, we could recover economically, and the government deficits could be brought under control.

And I COULD win the lottery. I COULD come up with the mathematical solution to figuring out how the universe works. I COULD become a death metal band rock star.

Pretty unlikely, but I COULD.

The deficit won't be brought under control because he is spending too much with not enough ways to create new wealth in this country. We aren't producing anything of substance. What are we producing that's going to create a booming sector of business to create new wealth for this country? Government sucks at funding R&D because they are too damn inefficient at it.

Yeah lets put government in charge of medical advances, like stem cell research, I'm sure they will make many breakthroughs.

Or maybe we should put them in charge of space exploration? Oh wait, we have already done that and they utter SUCK at it. Maybe I am a little bitter over the fact that half a century after making it into space we can't get a RC car to work right on mars for any length of time, but damn if I don't expect a little more out of 50 years of technological advances.

Your claims that the Obama admins budget projections mean that they are incompetent is nonsense.

No they are incompetent for many other reasons. They are incompetent because they continue to spend money with no real solution to the problem we are facing. But hey, when it doubt, attack Bush. Yes very productive.

As far as Obama's health care plan, I don't like it because it makes health care part of the cost of using U.S. workers, while everywhere else in the first world, health care cost is being carried by the government.

I almost got through your post with some respect for you given that you made some decent points throughout...but this just baffles me. U.S. workers pay for it....Government pays for it...ummm, I'm no political science major but, what is the difference? Where exactly does government derive its income from?

reply to post by grimreaper797


We agree all the way up to the point where you make this statement.

And as far as business involvement in government. If government had no involvement in business affairs, how would it be profitable to corrupt government. If they don't have anything to do with you, why would you corrupt them? There is no profit to be made if government never outsourced work to an outside business.

At this point you are going off the deep end.

I can already imagine where you are going with this, but I'll humor you anyway. Exactly how would this situation work. Government hires all of its own workers to carry out all government projects, sure that could happen, but government would still have to raise taxes, and that would effect businesses. Businesses would always be pushing to get contracts, to get government to do the things that business wants government to do.

The projects Obama is spending money on can be offset by cutting other costs. The huge bailouts were set up by GW before Obama ever got into office. Basically, everything you are saying here is complete nonsense.

The U.S. still leads the world in technological development. We are still the most productive country on the planet, and we produce a great many things. Which country started the last technical revolution that changed the world? Which country is most likely to start the next technical revolution?

When GDP goes up, then tax revenues will go up. That is the way it works.

reply to post by grimreaper797


How does government start paying for healthcare? With the tax money they are already collecting from the middle class and the working class.

Right now U.S. workers are paying most of the taxes that the government collects, but we are getting nothing back for our tax money. Therefore, Government should start paying for our healthcare, so that we start getting something back for the money we are paying into government.

Then government should seek tax revenues else where to pay back all the debt created by the republican admins. The real answer would be for government to collect it's tax revenue from goods and services that cross state and international borders. Those are the areas where government is concerned, and on which government spends most of its money, those are the areas that should be for the federal government.

poet, reaper, I am thinking ya'll just about hit a tie in arguments. There are pros, and cons in both arguments, but the real truth lies in the elite ability to divide, and conquer........remember that.