It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
I belive Bush will send the US economy into one drastic downturn. I'm from Canada where we pay higher taxes than most of the world. However, our social services are second to none and our healthcare system(although still ripe with problems) can't be beat. Imagine never having to pay for medical care??
Thats true Canada's healthcare is second to none. But America's military is second to none and it cost a pretty penny to keep it that way. More money then the rest of the world combined is willing or able to pay. If we had no need for a military we could have one hell of a healthcare system.
Sure, don't give Clinton any credit for the great economy while he was President. But be sure to blame Clinton for the recession that Bush claims he inherited from Clinton. Did you look at the historical graph of national debt as a percentage of GDP, which I posted earlier? If Bush's policies are allowed to continue, the federal government will be bankrupted.
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
If Clinton was so good for the economy then why did he pardon the biggest tax cheat in US history? How exactly was that a good thing for the US economy?
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
If Clinton was so good for the economy then why did he pardon the biggest tax cheat in US history? How exactly was that a good thing for the US economy?
Originally posted by muppet
I just looked at Kerry's campaign manifesto.
He say's he will cut the budget deficit in half by the end of his first 4 year term. Sounds good, but what does it mean?
Make Washington Live Within A Budget
John Kerry will cut the deficit in half during his first four years in office.
Pardon my intrusion. If I may offer an entirely different perspective. But first to say that:
The primary issue is not a deficit, or surplus for that matter, but world currency deflation. Allow me to explain my position.
The PNAC doctrine is one of hegemony, world domination, militarily as well as financially. The object militarily we have seen, but the financial aspect takes a bit longer, more than 4 years in fact.
The U.S of A is the strongest economy in the world, which for all intents and purposes can withstand a barrage of assault before it breaks. Such is the gamble, and that gamble is to reduce the debt load due to the cost of financing wars and the foreign investment needed to sustain such cost, and ensure dominance of trade.
The U.S is the largest importer in the world. So much so, that dependency on imports cripples the economy during times of excessive spending, such as in times of war. While many commodities are fixed for trade in USD, the necessities of life are fixed at the export markets currency. This mean for example, that fruits and vegetables are priced based on the currency of the exporting country, not a treaty assigned dollar value, and so the costs to import exceeds consumer spending.
Because of the excessive domestic deficit burden incurred by the U.S, the USD shrinks in value resulting in the foreign debt costing more with the increase in foreign exchange.
But, the opposite of that is the dependence of foreign countries which rely largely on the US for importing its products, such as France, which trades under the Euro. Currently as it stands, France (as an example) has the benefit of exporting many products to the US priced in Euros, which means that importers must pay an ever evaluating cost for same.
In steps the republican ideology of hegemony, the intent of which is to deflate foreign currency by stalling or allowing the imports from American businesses because it is just too expensive to order product. Those economies (e.g. France) stall because they depend on the export. In fact they not only stall they starve. The Euro devalues from want of investment, The USD rises in value eating away the deficits, and the republicans keep this up until the exporters are themselves crippled, so much so that all foreign debt amassed because of FX disappears.
In order for the European Nations to exit depression, OPEC is forced to trade solely in USD, as are they, EU nations, by virtue of the stranglehold on their other export products. The U.S debt is reduced, and (in PNAC's world) never again will the USD be forced into a foreign exchange scenario where the USD is worth less than any currency. The economic hegemony is complete.
However, as with the Bush administration�s miscalculation on the war, so too was their miscalculation on the FX. The EU, three months ago saw through the plan and threatened to devalue the EU currency to stave off the depression they faced.
For every action, there is a reaction, and unfortunately for bush and the PNAC authors, they were just a bit too opttimistic with their plans.
Originally posted by Springer
This thread is, I beleive, the penultimate example of an UTTER LACK of knowledge of economics I have ever seen...
The "Professor" TRIED to set some straight but was off-handedly dismissed by a BOGUS graph.
I.�Overview: Returning Deficits and the Need for Fiscal Reform
U.S. government finances have experienced a remarkable turnaround in recent years. Within only a few years, hard-won gains of the previous decade have been lost and, instead of budget surpluses, deficits are again projected as far as the eye can see. The deterioration has not been restricted to the federal budget but has also taken place at the state and local government levels. As a result, the U.S. general government deficit is now among the highest in the industrialized world, and public debt levels are approaching those in other major industrial countries.
Although fiscal policies have undoubtedly provided valuable support to the recovery so far, the return to large deficits raises two interrelated concerns. First, with budget projections showing large federal fiscal deficits over the next decade, the recent emphasis on cutting taxes, boosting defense and security outlays, and spurring an economic recovery may come at the eventual cost of upward pressure on interest rates, a crowding out of private investment, and an erosion of longer-term U.S. productivity growth.
Second, the evaporation of fiscal surpluses has left the budget even less well prepared to cope with the retirement of the baby boom generation, which will begin later this decade and place massive pressure on the Social Security and Medicare systems. Without the cushion provided by earlier surpluses, there is less time to address these programs' underlying insolvency before government deficits and debt begin to increase unsustainably, making more urgent the need for meaningful reform.
Originally posted by FreeMason
First: Entire premise of this thread is retarded.
Second: The thread creator obviously knows nothing about modern currency.