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.

 

U.S. loses AAA credit rating from S&P

page: 19
144
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions




posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by antmax21
 


Well put. On Friday the "non-farm payrolls" showed that of 117,000 new jobs occured in the month of July. I think that we are in for a bumpy ride but Obama must innovate. We need a new solution because the old ones simply will not work.
edit on 6-8-2011 by Tiger5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
The US finds itself in an interesting predicament. Increasing taxes most certainly will prolong the recession. Taxing job creators at higher rates will naturally result in throttling commercial growth. There's not much debating this. On the other hand, the US does not have a "fair" taxation playing field. It seems the bigger the company, the less it pays in taxes. The right claims this is to protect job creators. The left claims they don't pay their fair share. As usual, they're both wrong. The problem is it solidifies corporate monopolies which crush competition.

They've done this through regulations which create incredible barriers to entry in a market. Try starting a business out of your garage and see how many regulations you are violating. Try selling homemade diesel fuel. Try practicing medicine without a license. Try pumping your own gas in Oregon or New Jersey. Try erecting a commercial building and see how building, fire, electrical and energy codes will balloon your already tight budget (as I have).

So now we have a problem. You increase taxes on a corporation, and they will throttle growth. No debating this. However, they really don't pay their "fair" share compared to a small business. This is ALL the government's fault. The EASY solution is just freeze government spending at current levels. That will save roughly $10 billion in 10 years, not a pathetic $900 billion. The long term solution is shrinking our government budget back to 1990 levels and restructure the tax system to encourage competition once again.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Beginning of the end of Rome 2? History has shown that you just cant keep up this insane military spending and occupation. Not against all military spending. We should close all these overseas bases take a third of that funding and put it into military r&d so we can at least stay technologically ahead of everyone. There had to be a point where someone would say the fairytale is over, time to come to reality. The U.S. could definitely use a period of isolationism. Or at least we the people and our media should start holding our elected officials feet to the fire.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I have not had time to read ALL 18 pages of this thread but I did want to add something to the discussion, sorry if it has been covered.

The one thing that always gets me fired up is that China is the number 1 holder of US treasuries (well, not counting the FED who now holds that distinction)

Anyhow, won't they get more money from our credit rating being down-graded? I mean, if interest payments go up, those who get the payments benefit.

Seeing how they have been the ones giving us the cash, could it be that China has covertly pulled strings to make this happen. (I mean political strings, corporate strings, etc..)

PS. This whole republican vs democrat argument is getting old. Some Democrats are owned by Wall street, some Republicans are owned by banks. Both parties have been plagued and made victim to corruption.

Guess what? both parties Teamed up to give us this non deal "debt deal" that does nothing to fix anything.

Both parties teamed up to put us 14 trillion in debt in the first place.

All the while, they get away with it because they can count on an ignorant public to believe that "It's not me, it's those ignorant _____. Blame them"

Both parties are at fault, both parties are doing nothing but playing theater and blame games.

Raising taxes? Please! 14 trillion. 14 TRILLION!

Cutting Spending? Please! 14 TRILLION!


It would take 385.5 years to pay back the $14 trillion in debt with daily payments of 100 million. This even ignores any interest being charged. We are just Now being downgraded? What? We should of been down-graded 30 years ago?!?!?

I am not surprised that S&P downgraded from AAA. I am only surprised it has taken this long.


ETA: Also, both parties are corrupted by corporate interests. this is because corporations have the same rights as people? Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad issued the ground work for that. Want to end this debt madness? get the corporations out of government. end corporate rights that equal human rights.






edit on 6-8-2011 by sageofmoticello because: ETA



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


I don't think you have been keeping up with the spending in DOD and USAID.
voices.washingtonpost.com...



The document would move funding for Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan into a separate account, for "Overseas Contingency Operations," following the practice of the Department of Defense. Taken together, the two accounts would represent an 8 percent increase for the State Department and USAID over the 2010 budget--or total spending of nearly $58 billion.

The biggest increase would be in funding for Iraq, which would nearly double from the $2.8 billion spent in 2010. The reason for the rise: the State Department will assume responsibility for more than 400 activities from U.S. soldiers when they pull out at the end of 2011. The funding for U.S. diplomats, aid workers and civilian-run programs in the country is "more than offset by reduced costs for the Department of Defense," which would spend about $10 billion in Iraq in 2012, down from $62 billion in 2010, the document says.

en.wikipedia.org...




And if you notice the level off that happened in the graph its only because musical chairs were played with funding in Iraq an Afgahnistan. USAID picked up part of the tab. And don't forget this quote.



Defense Intelligence $50 billion 7% Because of classified nature, budget is an estimate and may not be the actual figure


They will not even tell you what the black budget is. And heres where SOCOM comes in.

counterpunch.com...




Once the neglected stepchildren of the military establishment, Special Operations forces have been growing exponentially not just in size and budget, but also in power and influence. Since 2002, SOCOM has been authorized to create its own Joint Task Forces -- like Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines -- a prerogative normally limited to larger combatant commands like CENTCOM. This year, without much fanfare, SOCOM also established its own Joint Acquisition Task Force, a cadre of equipment designers and acquisition specialists.

With control over budgeting, training, and equipping its force, powers usually reserved for departments (like the Department of the Army or the Department of the Navy), dedicated dollars in every Defense Department budget, and influential advocates in Congress, SOCOM is by now an exceptionally powerful player at the Pentagon. With real clout, it can win bureaucratic battles, purchase cutting-edge technology, and pursue fringe research like electronically beaming messages into people's heads or developing stealth-like cloaking technologies for ground troops. Since 2001, SOCOM's prime contracts awarded to small businesses -- those that generally produce specialty equipment and weapons -- have jumped six-fold.

Headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, but operating out of theater commands spread out around the globe, including Hawaii, Germany, and South Korea, and active in the majority of countries on the planet, Special Operations Command is now a force unto itself. As outgoing SOCOM chief Olson put it earlier this year, SOCOM "is a microcosm of the Department of Defense, with ground, air, and maritime components, a global presence, and authorities and responsibilities that mirror the Military Departments, Military Services, and Defense Agencies."

Tasked to coordinate all Pentagon planning against global terrorism networks and, as a result, closely connected to other government agencies, foreign militaries, and intelligence services, and armed with a vast inventory of stealthy helicopters, manned fixed-wing aircraft, heavily-armed drones, high-tech guns-a-go-go speedboats, specialized Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, as well as other state-of-the-art gear (with more on the way), SOCOM represents something new in the military. Whereas the late scholar of militarism Chalmers Johnson used to refer to the CIA as "the president's private army," today JSOC performs that role, acting as the chief executive's private assassination squad, and its parent, SOCOM, functions as a new Pentagon power-elite, a secret military within the military possessing domestic power and global reach.


SOCOM has become a second DOD. How do they do that with only 50 billion? Oh that was just a guess because your not allowed to know the real amount. SOCOMs budget is the War on Terror.
edit on 6-8-2011 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guidance.Is.Internal
The US finds itself in an interesting predicament. Increasing taxes most certainly will prolong the recession. Taxing job creators at higher rates will naturally result in throttling commercial growth. There's not much debating this. On the other hand, the US does not have a "fair" taxation playing field. It seems the bigger the company, the less it pays in taxes. The right claims this is to protect job creators. The left claims they don't pay their fair share. As usual, they're both wrong. The problem is it solidifies corporate monopolies which crush competition.

They've done this through regulations which create incredible barriers to entry in a market. Try starting a business out of your garage and see how many regulations you are violating. Try selling homemade diesel fuel. Try practicing medicine without a license. Try pumping your own gas in Oregon or New Jersey. Try erecting a commercial building and see how building, fire, electrical and energy codes will balloon your already tight budget (as I have).

Absolutely. The trade deficit With China is just ridiculous. It was something to help China come up in the world. But as with our oversea bases, these things should have stopped long ago once they have served their purpose. Government is too slow in acting on these issues. Funny thing is, funny as in Good Lord Stop! Not funny HA HA, is even though china has improved greatly and is falling away from communism, though not entirely. China is still a huge human rights violator and still has basically a slave manufacturing class. Which we perpetuate with the buying of their products. We really need to get off the backs of our own people with the ridiculous regulations and taxation.

Interesting thing I saw the other day on the history channel about Ben Franklin. It was amazing to see what one little stamp act tax did to the populace. That damn near kicked off the revolution all by itself. We are way to distracted to see all we should be pissed off about.

So now we have a problem. You increase taxes on a corporation, and they will throttle growth. No debating this. However, they really don't pay their "fair" share compared to a small business. This is ALL the government's fault. The EASY solution is just freeze government spending at current levels. That will save roughly $10 billion in 10 years, not a pathetic $900 billion. The long term solution is shrinking our government budget back to 1990 levels and restructure the tax system to encourage competition once again.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

U.S. loses AAA credit rating from S&P


news.yahoo.com

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States lost its top-notch AAA credit rating from Standard & Poor's on Friday, in a dramatic reversal of fortune for the world's largest economy.

S&P cut the long-term U.S. credit rating by one notch to AA-plus on concerns about growing budget deficits.

U.S. Treasuries, once undisputedly seen as the safest investment in the world, are now rated lower than bonds issued by countries such as the UK, Germany, France or Canada.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Screw them, then. Let's invade.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENTJa
Beginning of the end of Rome 2? History has shown that you just cant keep up this insane military spending and occupation. Not against all military spending. We should close all these overseas bases take a third of that funding and put it into military r&d so we can at least stay technologically ahead of everyone. There had to be a point where someone would say the fairytale is over, time to come to reality. The U.S. could definitely use a period of isolationism. Or at least we the people and our media should start holding our elected officials feet to the fire.


That's an interesting idea. Close the bases and divert a portion to R&D. Really, it's technology that wins wars. There's no freakin' way the US can be dominated in a conventional military sense. Too many proud, armed people with a lot to lose. That spells trouble for an adversary.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
is AA+ really that bad?



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



10%
you lost your mind...we could barely pave roads for that amount....much less support a standing military.


You may not be dumb - but this statement is.

The U.S. spends less than 200 billion on domestic infrastructure, and less than 900 billion on -every- expense within the military (for some reason, people like to add the interest of deficit military spending to the bottom line while excluding it from medicare estimates.... even though interest is handled under a separate part of the budget).

A 22% tax increase -WITH- a tax-prebate repaid to the poverty level was designed to be revenue-neutral - with our current non-SSI revenues at about 2.4 Trillion dollars (or something along those lines).

An across-the-board 10% tax with no prebate would easily pay for our infrastructure and military while it is in the course of fighting three wars abroad.

Seriously - I know we are on opposite sides of the spectrum a lot of times, Saturn - but you are better than the statement you just made.


However, if that was instituted, you know who would suffer the most? businesses...not because the rich are taxed though, hell, they can afford it...its because the middle and poor are also robbed of their spending power...which means they don't buy random crap, which means companys manufacture less and therefore sell less, firing people, etc.


That is why the Fair Tax proposal includes a prebate. Cost of living is taken into account and the taxes spent on sustaining one's self (or family) at the poverty level are paid up front for the fiscal year. In this way, it creates a natural graded tax system where those at the poverty level do not pay taxes on food and necessities while those who -spend- more are taxed according to their amount of spending - up to about 22%. Under this system - income taxes are removed and all monies are tax-deferred until used to purchase something - which no longer penalizes those wishing to save.


Rich people do -not- create jobs
companys do -not- create jobs
Demand does...and thats it...demand comes from middle class with extra money to burn...every economist around the world will tell you that (that isn't just a paid liar for a corporation).


It's a chicken-and-egg concept. There's massive amounts of demand for food in places like Egypt. I don't see a whole lot of people there investing in creating farms. Of course - they also don't have a whole lot of extra money to spend (though you would think food would come before most other expenses).

In either case - you need someone with the resources to organize and develop a business to provide a job and a service/good that will have favorable demand (there wasn't a demand for fast food restaurants, outright - people just gravitated towards places they could get food and get it quickly).

I honestly couldn't care less what an economist says. Their view is factored into my analysis of the situation against the observable trends in the economy.


We are now a AA+ ratings society...we are doing something wrong...yet the AAA societys are all heavy social program countrys...thats just the facts. We are in this mess due to unfunded entitlement programs...


You're better than this Saturn. Don't make me downgrade your intelligence rating.

The reason our CREDIT rating has gone DOWN is because of the amount of money being borrowed against itself in our country. The federal government has authorized the government to have a debt greater than our nation's GDP.

Perhaps you don't quite understand how money works in America - or anywhere else - but every time the government "borrows" money, it effectively prints more money without a marked increase in taxable economic activity. When you compare the relative prices of food and precious metals to housing prices and the like - you often see a correlation - IE - the price of gold goes up at roughly the same ratio as the price of food - though gold is more subject to microeconomic activity (rising and falling considerably within weeks even though the annual average trend shows little change). In either case - the point is that the dollar as fiat currency is levied against our productivity.

When Congress authorizes an increase in the debt ceiling - what they are doing is authorizing there to be more dollars floating around in the market with no real change in the actual productivity in America. For a short duration - that can stimulate economic activity as the economy has yet to adjust to the inflation of the dollar. However, over long periods of time and after being adopted as a standard practice, it simply leads to inflation - where you need two dollars to buy a loaf of bread as opposed to one - because there are twice as many dollars floating around out there without there being really any change in how many loaves of bread are made, how much iron ore is mined and exported, etc.

So - what congress just did was write yet another check that it cannot cash. In the REAL world - what is being done is looking at our economy and saying: "If this keeps up - the American Dollar will not be worth more than the paper it is printed on." It is, essentially, saying that America's government cannot be considered a responsible and trustworthy financial institution.

It is not an effect of unfunded entitlement programs. It is an effect of spending far more than we take in. Nothing more - nothing less.

However - I will say that healthcare spending on behalf of the federal government has increased several fold over the past 20 years - while military spending has remained about the same as it always has through history (around 4% of GDP). So - if you want to stop and ask yourself: "what are we doing, now, that we didn't do in the past 200 years of being a country...?" - it would be the expansion of entitlement programs as part of the federal budget.

Which would seem to indicate that spending (on entitlement programs - though the fact they are entitlement programs really isn't much of a factor in the overall credit rating) is what got us into this mess.

The logical fix for this is to prioritize and decrease spending.


I don't think that decreasing spending is our only problem! It seems we have a revenue problem with a constant decrease in living wage jobs and this is why we have entitlements! if these entitlements were not in place there would be riots when wages were not adjusted for inflation and jobs that are outsourced overseas to increase the multinational and international corporate profits through the WTO free trade programs. Entitlements are not a result of a lazy population dependent on government, it's a result of a lack of jobs creating this growing entitlement problem! This system was created to protect the elitist and without having this saftey net in place the suppressed population would otherwise be freaking out in the streets looking to hang some wealthy bankers. So as far as i'm concerned the people need a wake up call, so for all i care cut entitlements and hang the bankers, politicians and Elitist scum that lead us down this longest road to nowhere! As for military and defense spending
these are suppressive tactics of an empiric fascist regime intent on resource theft for the western world. The US military is a puppet for the western nations with over 700 bases in 120 countries around the world. When will we all realize war is a racket of the tyrannous elitist central bankers that can profit off of all this debt whether through
entitlements, military or other borrowing makes no difference to them.

"I believe that banking institution are more dangerous than standing armies… If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency… the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of their property first through inflation then through deflation, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826).



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by Aim64C
 


I don't think you have been keeping up with the spending in DOD and USAID.
voices.washingtonpost.com...



The document would move funding for Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan into a separate account, for "Overseas Contingency Operations," following the practice of the Department of Defense. Taken together, the two accounts would represent an 8 percent increase for the State Department and USAID over the 2010 budget--or total spending of nearly $58 billion.

The biggest increase would be in funding for Iraq, which would nearly double from the $2.8 billion spent in 2010. The reason for the rise: the State Department will assume responsibility for more than 400 activities from U.S. soldiers when they pull out at the end of 2011. The funding for U.S. diplomats, aid workers and civilian-run programs in the country is "more than offset by reduced costs for the Department of Defense," which would spend about $10 billion in Iraq in 2012, down from $62 billion in 2010, the document says.

en.wikipedia.org...




And if you notice the level off that happened in the graph its only because musical chairs were played with funding in Iraq an Afgahnistan. USAID picked up part of the tab. And don't forget this quote.



Defense Intelligence $50 billion 7% Because of classified nature, budget is an estimate and may not be the actual figure


They will not even tell you what the black budget is. And heres where SOCOM comes in.

counterpunch.com...




Once the neglected stepchildren of the military establishment, Special Operations forces have been growing exponentially not just in size and budget, but also in power and influence. Since 2002, SOCOM has been authorized to create its own Joint Task Forces -- like Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines -- a prerogative normally limited to larger combatant commands like CENTCOM. This year, without much fanfare, SOCOM also established its own Joint Acquisition Task Force, a cadre of equipment designers and acquisition specialists.

With control over budgeting, training, and equipping its force, powers usually reserved for departments (like the Department of the Army or the Department of the Navy), dedicated dollars in every Defense Department budget, and influential advocates in Congress, SOCOM is by now an exceptionally powerful player at the Pentagon. With real clout, it can win bureaucratic battles, purchase cutting-edge technology, and pursue fringe research like electronically beaming messages into people's heads or developing stealth-like cloaking technologies for ground troops. Since 2001, SOCOM's prime contracts awarded to small businesses -- those that generally produce specialty equipment and weapons -- have jumped six-fold.

Headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, but operating out of theater commands spread out around the globe, including Hawaii, Germany, and South Korea, and active in the majority of countries on the planet, Special Operations Command is now a force unto itself. As outgoing SOCOM chief Olson put it earlier this year, SOCOM "is a microcosm of the Department of Defense, with ground, air, and maritime components, a global presence, and authorities and responsibilities that mirror the Military Departments, Military Services, and Defense Agencies."

Tasked to coordinate all Pentagon planning against global terrorism networks and, as a result, closely connected to other government agencies, foreign militaries, and intelligence services, and armed with a vast inventory of stealthy helicopters, manned fixed-wing aircraft, heavily-armed drones, high-tech guns-a-go-go speedboats, specialized Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, as well as other state-of-the-art gear (with more on the way), SOCOM represents something new in the military. Whereas the late scholar of militarism Chalmers Johnson used to refer to the CIA as "the president's private army," today JSOC performs that role, acting as the chief executive's private assassination squad, and its parent, SOCOM, functions as a new Pentagon power-elite, a secret military within the military possessing domestic power and global reach.


SOCOM has become a second DOD. How do they do that with only 50 billion? Oh that was just a guess because your not allowed to know the real amount. SOCOMs budget is the War on Terror.
edit on 6-8-2011 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)


I heard the Black budget could be as high as 300 billion dollars a year but who knows! I really don't know how the people of this once great land allowed this to happen to us. With government growing every year i now hear that all federal city and state workers make up 34% of our workforce and thats not incuding all the jobs created by these jobs or the security and military percentages but i figure it's probably about 50%. Our Government is nothing more then the largest parasite ever seen to exist and drains our future wealth away at an ever increasing rate. yet the larger it grows the more out of control the regulations and laws unless your a corporation or bank thats TBTF then you also become part of this diseased parasite! Welcome to 1984 in 2011!



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
"what are we doing, now, that we didn't do in the past 200 years of being a country...?" - it would be the expansion of entitlement programs as part of the federal budget.

Lets not forget the tax rate is the lowest its been since 1958

Now, lets consider the military end of things

Check this out...this is where our income tax dollars go..(social security is not here because social security is a seperate entity, which is removed also specifically for SS...this is FICA)

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
Amazing, isn't it...its best to not go by the GDP scam, that is a complete fabrication, the numbers and where the money goes once we pay up is what matters.

SS should never be touched, by itself, it can be stable, its when people dig into it as revenue (and to hide big spending on fed funds..typically black projects) is when suddenly we find crisis.


On September 10, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,000,000,000,000 in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions." According to a report by the Inspector General, the Pentagon cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends.

Sadly, this money was never accounted for due to the fact that all the info for where it was, was in building 7...which coincidently fell down and dustified everything.

But consider what that snippit said...
over 2 trillion dollars...about 25% of what it spends....so, how much exactly are we spending on military today (this was september 10th...a day before any emergency funding and raising...and before Bush increased over and over the spending limits...)

What is different now verses 200 years ago? Well, we are warlords of earth would be a good start..not saying that the deep black projects aren't important (although we never get to use the cool stuff), just saying, if we want to continue being warlords, we gotta raise taxes...iron fists need to be maintained and repaired.


Which would seem to indicate that spending (on entitlement programs - though the fact they are entitlement programs really isn't much of a factor in the overall credit rating) is what got us into this mess.

The logical fix for this is to prioritize and decrease spending.


No, the entitlement programs is the tiny scraps tossed off the tables of kings so the starving dog can nip at it...the feast will not somehow be saved if we decide to remove the scraps, it will only make the dogs become ravenous and the kings just a little bit fatter.

Your totally sold on propaganda that is given to the plebs in society to keep the focus off of the machine we are in. Same ole same ole...royalty blaming all the loss of wealth on witches, meanwhile they eat off of golden platters.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Those wealthy people that you want to increase taxes on already pay a high amount porportionaly wise. The top 2% of highest income already pays 38% of all incoming tax money, and the top 10% of income people pay a staggering 70% of tax income to the government. I am not in that 10 % group, far from it, but I can see this group pays what seems to be the majority of taxes.
Also, while I am on this topic, I am furious that over 50% of the population pays no taxes at all ( income tax ). Not only that, those leeches get earned income back on income tax refunds. They get extra money on top of their welfare, food stamps, free breakfast and lunches for their kids, housing, medical, etc. It seems to me that everyone needs to pay in something. I do not care if the bottom 25% of people pay in once a year even only thirty dollars! The idea is that anything given to you is never taken care of as well as something you have to pay for. While I totally feel that the truly handicapped, disabled, mentally incompetent, the aged ( hey I am getting there myself ! ), all need support, there are enormous amounts of people who are physically and mentally able to work and choose not to. The more we make it financially easier to stay at home the less willing people are to work.
Having been a teacher for 35 years, I can tell you about the incredible amount of food thrown out because the kids did not like the healthy veggies, etc. If they were really hungry, there would be no food left! I can say this because my parents paid for my school lunches and it was my one really good meal of the day. I did not leave a crumb on my plate! I was hungry and I ate. These parents are willing to pay for cell phones, fancy clothing , gold teeth, etc. If a child is really in need we can tell and that child is helped. I have even myself bought bags of groceries for children. Ok, I know I have vented, but I am so tired of the same old view of keep taxing the ultra wealthy, but folks ,our government is turning a once working thriving middle class into a welfare nation bereft of work ethics and thrift....ok, I 'm done now....



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


do you have a problem with the us constitution saturn?

all taxes must be uniform throughout this land followed by property rights and minority rights.

no person is above the law everyone pays and thats the law.


Might want to reread the 16th amendment



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


are you considering popluation growth? less people in 1958

are you considering healthcare? medicare and medicaid didnt exist in 1958 and the cost of healthcare was alot lower

are you considering inflation? 1 1958 dollar is $7.58

and cost of living was much cheaper.

i see alot of people throw up charts and graphs but never think of the above.


hell 1 million dollars in 1950 would be worth over 9 million dollars today.

those trillion billion dollars numbers being thrown around the value of the dollar is meaningless
edit on 6-8-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guidance.Is.Internal

Originally posted by AGENTJa
Beginning of the end of Rome 2? History has shown that you just cant keep up this insane military spending and occupation. Not against all military spending. We should close all these overseas bases take a third of that funding and put it into military r&d so we can at least stay technologically ahead of everyone. There had to be a point where someone would say the fairytale is over, time to come to reality. The U.S. could definitely use a period of isolationism. Or at least we the people and our media should start holding our elected officials feet to the fire.


That's an interesting idea. Close the bases and divert a portion to R&D. Really, it's technology that wins wars. There's no freakin' way the US can be dominated in a conventional military sense. Too many proud, armed people with a lot to lose. That spells trouble for an adversary.


The US should focus what is really important: maintaining a high quality of living for it's citizens instead of remaining the single superpower status at all costs.
It leaves no doubt that China will have a larger military than the USA within 10 to 30 years. That country has a population of 1.4 billion. And with an annual economic growth of 10% they will surpass. So the USA will lose an arms race to China if they start one.
But is that a disaster? China is not going to invade America. At least not militarily. The US does not necessarily need to be the single military superpower in the world. To contain the growing might of China the US could work together with other countries in a more multilateral approach and may stay more out of other countries affairs (like Taiwan when it comes to China).
For the rest of it, they should focus on a high quality of life of it's citizens and try to secure American jobs.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


are you considering popluation growth? less people in 1958

The baby boomers were in primary school at that point.




are you considering healthcare? medicare and medicaid didnt exist in 1958 and the cost of healthcare was alot lower

are you considering inflation? 1 1958 dollar is $7.58

and cost of living was much cheaper.

i see alot of people throw up charts and graphs but never think of the above.


hell 1 million dollars in 1950 would be worth over 9 million dollars today.

those trillion billion dollars numbers being thrown around are meaning for the simple fact the value of the dollar is meaningless


More social programs are expensive, more tax payers alleviates that
unless of course you got more social programs and some dip--it decides to reduce the tax rate to a unsupportable number

Thanks dubya...

All a moot point. Obama will veto any extension of the BTC and it will all be resolved without issue, and hell, S&P might see we can pay our bills without worry again and re-upgrade us once its done and over with.

And if he doesn't, well, I personally will rally against his re-election...I mean hell, I would rather be stabbed in the front by the opposition than in the back by a supposed leader of our side.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers.



The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises...but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States...



No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. This clause basically refers to a tax on property, such as a tax based on the value of land,[2] as well as a capitation.


yeah i read it and money is property and sounds like what i said cant take property aka money from one person and not take it from others.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
This downgrade is not a BIG surprise. S&P sent the message some months ago saying that they would do so if they couldn't see solid measures to solve the deficit imbalance. The market has already partially priced that. Having said that, the European open on Monday will be interesting. Gents, be long in gold if you can...GLD is a good option if you don't want to hold the golden bars.




top topics



 
144
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join