American Austerity, What could it look like?

reply to post by N3k9Ni


Wow, okay, let me put the dots a little closer together for you. You proposed a list of insignificant cuts to the budget, and I pointed out that cutting out entire programs like those wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket compared to making even a percentage cut to entitlements. You asked me which ones I would cut, I answered that we should cut 50% from all of them, but the point is, no matter where you cut it's going to hurt.

That a bit simpler for you?

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by N3k9Ni

 

Wow, okay, let me put the dots a little closer together for you. You proposed a list of insignificant cuts to the budget, and I pointed out that cutting out entire programs like those wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket compared to making even a percentage cut to entitlements. You asked me which ones I would cut, I answered that we should cut 50% from all of them, but the point is, no matter where you cut it's going to hurt.

That a bit simpler for you?

It's very clear to me, now. You're making it up as you go along, but making no sense. For example:

That's the point, we can't just go through and cut out stuff without it hurting----it's all going to hurt! Slash entitlements across the board 50% and see where that gets us. Just as crashed as we will be if they get slashed by 100% because we default and the dollar becomes worthless.

Entitlements make up 50% of government spending. Cutting that by 50% would reduce spending by 25%. What I proposed would reduce spending by a minimum of 30%. 30% is more than 25%.

reply to post by beezzer

The "social clock" needs to be rolled back NOW before auserity kicks in.

And if children are paying the price, it'll be due to the parents who skipped out on responsibility.

and the death of children are now justified in your eyes because the very poor damaged the economy,
oh wait wasn't it the banks that destroyed the economy?

you find the death of children acceptable?
because you hate the idea of wealfare?

i am sickened by you



childeren have no say in politics why should they bear the brunt of failed polices?

you are a sociopath, plain and simple

xploder

if you want to know what it looks like read "the shock doctrine" by naomi klein.

Originally posted by hdutton
reply to post by N3k9Ni

 

A little something which we could add would be to stop our warring adventures and let the rest of the world learn to stand on their own feet for a change.

This would entail closing all our over seas bases and brining these people home. Stop all foriegn aid, especially to those countries and governments who refuse to be our "true" allies, and let the world police it's self for a while.

oh, what? After all that effort and lives lost and personal sacrifice of the American people to prop up the rest of the world? Why give up when victory is so close at hand? It is not over until the newest recruits of women and gay personnel have had a chance to prove themselves in the field and make their contribution. But only Randy knows the true answer. Sometimes more is less:

Originally posted by XPLodER

and the death of children are now justified in your eyes because the very poor damaged the economy,
oh wait wasn't it the banks that destroyed the economy?

you find the death of children acceptable?
because you hate the idea of wealfare?

i am sickened by you

This is a classic argument - "it's for the children" people scream, "they are innocent"... It is a tired argument.

This is true but when did paying for the lifetime mistakes of others become MY problem. I chose to have one child despite the financial ability to support many - you know why? So I could provide not just survival for my offspring but so that I can set my offspring up for success with a good education, a nest egg in cash and land.

I made good decisions, I saved and invested and worked hard. All for what - so others can reproduce at will and without any consequences and send me the bill? This is stupid.

To take the fruits of one person’s labor by force for the purpose of giving it to another is theft. This is without regard to the relative perceived need of the recipient (or their children) or the perceived wealth of the person from whom the assets are being seized, plain and simple. It is theft regardless if it be at the point of a gun or force of law.

The only way people will ever be properly motivated to change their behavior is to have to suffer a consequence from the action. Action - reaction.... Do people in 2012 really not know where babies come from…it’s not the cabbage patch.

The problem is that our society has made repetitive poor decision making too comfortable for a large segment of the population while penalizing the remainder who make good choices. All, for the sake of the children…

Compassion is good, charity is nice but to do it to the point we are not only sustaining and indefinitely supporting the weak, stupid and the lazy we are doing so without imposing any sort of restrictions. Why should people on welfare/public support be able to reproduce and not only that be rewarded for it with more money at the expense of the others? I’m all for welfare for a teen Mom for a while – but when she has the second kid, my support begins to dwindle and each one after that…


We have taken the role of the indulgent and understanding parent who mitigates on a regular basis the poor decisions of our children without the opposite and equally important role of the rule/boundary setting parent who imposes limits on children who demonstrate the inability to solve their own problems.

A family with only the former would soon be bankrupt both morally and financially.


Supporting the weak and lazy at the expense of the driven and strong is antithetical to nature and why we are in the current predicament.

Originally posted by XPLodERchilderen have no say in politics why should they bear the brunt of failed polices?

Life is cruel and unfair and it's even more so when your parents are poor, uneducated or lazy. Not my problem. Can't save them all as much as we'd like to.

reply to post by Golf66


the childeren did not write the laws,
they did not spend the money
to "not care" what happens to them because of failed policies,
is cold and heartless

dont be a heartless person, childeren should not suffer for political ideology

NEVER

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


childeren should not suffer for political ideology

They always do, though, because we Americans haven't learned a damn thing in 500 years about what matters and what doesn't. But we're not ignorant savages, you know, like the people we called ignorant savages.

The Seventh Generation philosophy of the Mohawk is, “We do not inherit the land from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.”

We'll default on our kids a lot sooner than we'll default on crooked bankers.

reply to post by frazzle

We'll default on our kids a lot sooner than we'll default on crooked bankers

i love your quote about borrowing the world from future generations,
they will not inherant our debt,
the bankers will go to jail
we will fix this planet
we will come together and remember that we are care takers of this planet

mark my words

the children are our future
our only future

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by frazzle

 

We'll default on our kids a lot sooner than we'll default on crooked bankers

i love your quote about borrowing the world from future generations,
they will not inherant our debt,
the bankers will go to jail
we will fix this planet
we will come together and remember that we are care takers of this planet

mark my words

the children are our future
our only future

xploder

edit on 16-5-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-5-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)

Our children have no future unless we learn something from the Icelanders.

reply to post by frazzle

Our children have no future unless we learn something from the Icelanders.

people have
they are waking up to unity,
and they now understand it is the bankers who control our lives,
when the two things hit critical mass you get iceland,
because they are a small country it took less time to achive,
trust me what has been started canot be stopped

the bankers will be prosicuted for their crimes

xploder

reply to post by N3k9Ni


Erm....I'm not sure why you're having such trouble keeping up. Yes, your proposals INCLUDING slashing the defense budget (which I mentioned in the beginning was the other huge part of our budget) by 50% would indeed cut a huge chunk----leave out the defense cuts, and it's a drop in the bucket. If you slash the entitlement programs by 50% AS WELL, you're starting to talk real savings. Cutting defense by 50% is STILL not enough to solve our budget issues.

Why not drop the condescending attitude and try to have a big kid conversation? You might find yourself keeping up much easier. Let me know if you need me to simplify any more of my posts; I tried to make this one as unconfusing for you as possible.

reply to post by 00nunya00


It's hard to keep up with someone that changes their mind as much as you have. I'm glad you finally admit you agree with me. If you had said that in the first place, we could have avoided your whole silly conversation.

Thank you. Don't expect me to reply to any more of your foolishness.

reply to post by N3k9Ni


LOL! Okay dude, however you want to twist it. If you need to save a little face by trying to make it sound like I was the least bit unclear or waffling, go ahead.

I have a feeling that once subsidized housing, medicare, and foodstamps goes, there will be spontaneous riots of varying sizes at the offices. There will be no sense of direction, and it will spill over to looting to local stores.

The OWS movement would have already had a leg up, but I suspect there will be staggered waves of mass civil unrest with no one thing in common except a former dependence on the system.

Hypothetically, if TPTB can set up enough police jobs, and/or have their local National Guard available in preparation for this, FEMA Camps would/could start filling with the "rebellious" homeless, hungry, protesting, looters. There will be more protesters than can be handled by typical police, so (crazy as it seems) we could possibly expect foreign troops on U.N. orders here...Though it hasn't happened in Europe yet to my knowledge. Europe is the one to watch here, We could get Iceland, or We could get Greece.

Please limit the fights amongst yourselves, this is a topic that doesn't need to be argued on, but speculated on.

reply to post by Golden Rule


I can only hope your reply was intended with some measure of jest.

Being raised in the "real world" I learned at an early age that sometimes it is best not to continue with a lost cause. Much like when my favorite dog got old an sick. There was, not only no money but. no real need to take him to a vet and prolong the enevitable. He was dying. It is not pretty or pleasant, but somethings you can't change.

For one thing this "war on terror" was grossly , if not intentionally, mishandled. The attacks on 9/11 should have been dealt with as the criminal acts, which they were. Once a government declares war on an opponent, they elevate that opponent to a higher status. A gang of thugs do not deserve such recognition. Had the attack been dealt with in this way, the conflict would have long been over.

As this was not the case, we have made, and continue to make , more enemies than we do friends through out the world. I deeply regret the loss of life and the expenditure of treasure which we have made toward our security in this manner. You are far safer among friends than when trying to constantly fight off an enemy.

As for the financial crises we were given, tanks to Wall Street.

I can help but wonder if we would not have been better served by having the government buy up all the mortages held by the banks and have the home owners pay money back directly to them. This would have given the banks what they were due and left money in the economy for other uses. I don't doubt the government could
have "forgiven" many of these mortages and allowed that money to be circulated and taxed as a way to better support the economy. This, or some version of it, would have been far better than just giving the banks more money and allowing them to continue to foreclose on the homes anyway.

Well, I know I am not smart enough to fix the world's problems but sometimes I get carried away when I vent.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by matthewgraybeal
Many of us on here are keeping score on global finance. What I'm curious about is when the bad money comes back to haunt our government, what Austerity measures will be forced upon the citizens and what slashes and cuts or worse could we expect? Any thoughts, or theories out there in ATS land?

Excellent question!
S&F

American austerity will look like America before social programs and big government took over.

Personal responsibility, individuality.

People taking care of themselves without the nanny-state.

You mean back to the days when riots in Amrican cities were common with people demanding the government step in a do something about their sorry lives? We are were we are for a reason. Those people of the past did not and could not take care of themselves and acted out until somebody did. I know that does not jive with the fantasy of American history or the rest of the world for that matter but, it is simply reality.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by frazzle

 

Our children have no future unless we learn something from the Icelanders.

people have

they are waking up to unity,
and they now understand it is the bankers who control our lives,
when the two things hit critical mass you get iceland,
because they are a small country it took less time to achive,
trust me what has been started canot be stopped

the bankers will be prosicuted for their crimes

xploder

Admittedly I am old and grouchy ~ and cynical ~ and pessimistic to boot, but as you can see, we have a dispute going on right here on ATS about what all "we" should cut to save the economy. Its like people can't see that "we" don't have a say in who gets screwed first, congress does, and they've already shown their intent to screw the people while saving the Pentagon and Wall Street. And yet too many of us who won't admit there is only one strategy that will work ~ for ALL the people to put down their petty little meisms and unite against those who DO deliberately screw us.

You're right about Iceland being a small country with a fairly unified culture and to be honest, the only way I could see anything like that happening here is if the US broke up into regions or even reverted back to the tenth amendment where we could focus our efforts within the states.

Meanwhile I don't think the powers that be want it to stop, they want a good reason to declare martial law.

reply to post by frazzle


No one is going to argue that Wall St didn't screw us, but seriously, they didn't create our budget, congress did. Our *elected* congress. And we can't solve our situation by *just* bringing down the financial PTB, because we'd still be left with that little problem of NOT HAVING ENOUGH MONEY TO COVER OUR BUDGET. That's worth fighting over, because we can unite all we want and we still won't be able to pay our bills. Seriously, how do you think we got into the mess of being beholden to the banks? We BORROWED our way into slavery. Because we couldn't balance the frigging budget. You think "they" exist without "our" letting them?

You can try to feel superior, but you still have no solutions besides "unite." Yeah, unite? Give us a plan for that, buddy.

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
reply to post by seabag

 

Austerity in the U.S. is going to cause the same thing it has done in Europe: causing massive private employment cuts. A lot of these people simply won't be able to get jobs.

edit on 16-5-2012 by AnIntellectualRedneck because: (no reason given)

Well lets look at it this way. I hope some of the big corporations fail so that the mom & pop business can thrive once again in addition to the quality of the merchandise (locally/small scale produced goods) vs commercial crops atleast with the food and beverage industry. People will have to learn to live off the land (to the best) to supplement their expenses and needs. Thats just part of the image I have in mind. People survived before the Big Government, Wall St, Fed era. I'm sure the small scale and alternative industries will thrive. Sorta like what the third world countries have it going for themselves. Thats what I can think of at this time on a positive note. Ofcourse the negative note will involve violence, looting, robberies and crimes and/or civil unrest.

In another words...one step forward, two steps backwards is what the economy is going to do.