What the next 4 years are going to look like

Originally posted by mrnotobc

I'd like to help your memory out a little here. First of all, Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming buy the Rebublicans into cutting the budget. If democrats had been in full charge it would never have happened. Never the less Clinton deserves credit for seeing the hand writing on the wall, and doing the right thing. Liberals don't seem to be able to remember this part of it.

More inportantly, even though there was a budget surplus, not one dime of the federal debt was paid down. All the extra revenue was spent elsewhere. I'm not pointing fingers there, I'm sure all were guilty for that.

The budget cutting was part of the republican contract with america. Clinton wanted no part of it. Also even though there was a budget surplus, the federal debt still increased. Back then seems in my mind like the last time the republicans were half ass good. After Clinton they started spending like drunken sailors. Then Oboma came along and showed us how to really spend.

I have a question concerning the next 4 years.

If the Obama administration is raising taxes to lower the debt, and cutting spending to lower the debt. . .

Then why does Guitner was to eliminate the debt ceiling?

Originally posted by beezzer
I have a question concerning the next 4 years.

If the Obama administration is raising taxes to lower the debt, and cutting spending to lower the debt. . .

Then why does Guitner was to eliminate the debt ceiling?

Because Oboma isn't talking about a balanced budget. He's not going to lower the debt. All he's going to do is cut the deficit spending very slightly. Think pimple on an elephants butt. The budget will still be in a deficit, and the federal dept will still be increasing.

reply to post by Hefficide


I am in full and complete agreement with most things you post Heff, but that last bit about a balanced budget at the end of the Clinton argument. Well, it just doesn't paint the entire picture.

There were more than a few MASSIVE corporations, GROSSLY inflating their profits and propping up an already OVERINFLATED stock market. Off course tax revenue was at an all time high based on this BS economic growth. Soo... Anyhow, truth comes out, internet turns out not to be soo profitable, stock market corrects, and then there is 9/11, which could be construed as partially a result of clinton administration policies per the 9/11 commission. So that "balanced" budget soo many point to, well it should have an asterisk by it in my opinion.

reply to post by beezzer


That is just it he is raising taxes to keep spending levels where they are at he knows the tax increase is not going to cover anything.

The cost of SS,medicare,medicaid are the largest federal expendures of federal taxes, as people age, as more people go on them raising taxes is just blind ideology.

Originally posted by CB328

the problems facing this country that have been the most damaging were started under the Roosevelt administration

I can't believe anyone still believes this crap anymore- it's like those people who claim the holocaust never happened, or the world is only 6000 years old.

You realize that the most prosperous society in history was after Roosevelt's reforms right?

Regulation is nothing but wealth destruction,job destruction, and totalitarianism

This is just insanity.

FD Roosevelt's "reforms" did NOT repair the US economy, they prolonged the Great Depression.
It was WWII that lifted the US out of Depression. The military-industrial complex went full bore.

It helped that the US was the only major industrial country in the world left standing at the end of WWII with its factories & cities untouched by bombs.

Neo, you know I respect and like you as a person - so please take this as constructive.... We have a lot of work to do in this nation to get ourselves out of a hole that is 30 years, or more, deep. Do you want to be part of the solution? Are you willing to to compromise and do what's best for all - even if that means having to accept some things that don't exactly match up with your personal views? Or are you going to just stay bitter and see it all crash and burn, just so you can say "I told you so?" I'm willing to find the middle ground to do what's best for everyone, the wealthy and corporations included. Are you willing to include the disenfranchised and poor in your vision of a perfect America? This game is no longer about who wins - it's getting to a point where we all win or we all lose.

reply to post by Hefficide

Heff, I use to hate you, then I loved you,.....

This is really naive of you. Jekyl Island. 1920's....etc

Just sayin'

reply to post by neo96


Star and Flag for this tread.

We are now in whats called an Ineptocracy, a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Generally I would fall somewhere in the middle of the two parties and I wasn’t extremely happy with the choices for this election but went republican as it was the lesser of two evils. Would love to see Allen West give it a go though!

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Cosmic911

 

my faith is lacking that anyone in Washington really cares about you or me.

The only thing they care about is your vote that is it, some bribe you for it that has led us to this point.

I have posted this idea before, but I don't know if anyone noticed. Then I got validation, I'm not the only one who saw it:

My contention is that Obama bought votes with taxpayers' money thru the expanded use of Food Stamps.
Qualifying for Food Stamps was made easier -- they lowered the bar.

This was done, not out of compassion, but to INTENTIONALLY make as many people dependent on government handouts as possible. In the month of July 2012, more than 600,000 new people were placed on Food Stamps.

It ensured that millions of Americans would vote for Obama for fear of losing their Food Stamps.

Forty-seven (47.1) million Americans are now on Food Stamps.

The 2012 Obama campaign was well planned and the dirtiest, the sleaziest presidential campaign I've ever seen.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Komonazmuk

 

Well that explains it thanks for reminding me all about the red and blue pills:

Hollywood playing politics.

That clip explains American politics to a T.

edit on 18-11-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Thanks, it's been a long time since I've watched "The Matrix" -- and I've never seen it before with subtitles in Portuguese.

It's obvious from many of the responses here, that many are still asleep.

Others know they're on the Titanic, but are in denial that it's sinking. They insist that re-arranging the deck chairs will save us.

Maybe we should all just bite the bullet and give the government what they want. We all go to work (meaning those interested in working) and have our employer send our entire paycheck to the government. Our government can then take a handling fee and send us an allowance card so we can purchase food, water, etc. from stores they regulate so that we don't eat or drink something bad for us. We will be completely taken care of, they will be responsible only unto themselves for assuring they do what they say they will, and we will all live in a utopia.

It will be so nice to be told everything we can and can't do, everything we can and can't have. That will be pure heaven! We will be safe. And finally...we will all be equal. Not just in theory, but in practice. Because you know that people who are really smart, effective and currently rich, will simply lie back and take it easy...because it is important that we are all equal in EVERY way...right?

Trust me...it will be great! And of course God...I mean our government, would never do anything wrong and will always take responsibility for errors on their part. You know...its not like they would lie or anything. Hell, we can then all pray to the same God who protects us and tells us right from wrong. Right?

Equality is a great thing...especially when forced. All the livestock in the field are equal as are the dead...and they seem happy. There is no reason to be "good" let alone "great" when we all get "participation awards". Hell, you don't even have to try...just breathe. Damn...I should have submitted to this liberal mind-set long ago. Here I am, busting my ass, working two jobs, waking up at 2AM to do computer work then going to my regular job at 8AM for 8 hours. I could just be equal and take a break. I think my neighbor makes more than I do so I can take some of his money. Not me myself...that would be theft. But if the government does it for me, then everything is just fine.

And just to think...all this will cost me is freedom.

reply to post by sirjunlegun


Jeckyll Island and that long ago meeting in 1913 are part of the problem to be sure. In fact the arguments against FDR hold merit as well - with the caveat that I think the guy had a full plate and at least he had the testicular fortitude to make the tough calls - even a few wrong ones.

Even the shot about me being naive about Clinton and the budget has technical truth to it. Not total, but partially.

The point is that these are things. They are pieces of the puzzle and not the entire puzzle itself. And there are hundreds of other puzzle pieces on the table. Some we discuss here, on ATS, some we don't. I'd even imagine there are quite a few that we will never learn about in this lifetime - or could end up disappeared if we happened to.

My point is that these pieces change nothing in the big picture. Those men at Jeckyll Island? They simply bent the rules of the game in their own favor. They cheated a bit. It's a game of Monopoly and they swiped some $500's from the bank when everyone else was on a bathroom break.

So be it.

We can undo that damage just as easily as they caused it - and with the same methods. I grew up a street fighter and I learned the true lesson of all successful street fighters - it's only cheating if there is a referee standing there. All is fair in war.

Look, Slick Willie Clinton got caught with a mildly cute chubby girl and viola' - instant balanced budget. Now, sure, he played a ton of accounting tricks to make this happen - but he made it happen nonetheless. That ZOMG - we're all DOOMED debt clock we sometimes link here at ATS. Same game. Accountants playing tricks to make it all look as morbid and frightening as it possibly can look. They're street fighters of a different breed and they love to shoot us the low blow.

The truth of it all? Worse than we'd want - better than they say. But we're never going to find out the proper details until we let them know that we're fighters as well and that, when threatened, we will quit arguing among ourselves and we WILL plant a firm fist into the no-no bits of any politician or public servant who tries to snow us.

Let's all stop fighting just long enough to make a pact... we'll leave each other along just long enough for us to get the crooks, liars, and scam artists out of Washington. Then we'll scrub the place up nice and shiny, insert a few men with honor and integrity, MAKE them pass legislation that prevents them from going bad.... And THEN we can get back to this business of wanting to shoot each other in the faces over our ideological differences.

Deal?

~Heff

There is no fix...

I am convinced of this.

It doesn't matter who is in office. The repubs have gad chances as well as the Democrats. There is no difference anymore.

The debt ceiling means squat and we will keep chugging along at a stagnated snails pace....why....because that is the "global" way...........

This is what you get with free trade agreements and a global point of view. Nothing special, just there with the rest of the world.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Really all I have to do is look out side my front door at foreclosed signs

Really that's what happens when people live above their means regardless of who's in the white house. Foreclosures aren't a new concept. I was out of work for 4 months in 2009 after being medically discharged from the USAF. VA didn't kick in making payments to me until 2010. However, because I lived within my means and saved money, I was able to collect my roughly $300.00 unemployment check for that time to buy food for my family and use my savings to pay bills. Never faced foreclosure on the property.

However, people living above their means (making $50,000 while taking loans and living at $200,000 income) would have been behind on their payments. Seems like you feel everyone should have this luxury. Lets give everyone the opportunity to live above their means and one day face foreclosure because they lose their job.

Originally posted by neo96
, out of business signs.

Businesses come and go... sorry to say. If a Walmart and Lowes move in and takes all the business from other stores because they sell stuff cheaper, that's not President Obama's fault.

Keep whining... it's not all doom and gloom. I happen to take pride in my President.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by zroth

 

Money has never made man happy, nor will it, there is nothing in its nature to produce happiness. The more of it one has the more one wants.

Benjamin Franklin

Rob from the greedy give to the needy, rinse and repeat, the more one has the more they take as in taxation.

I can understand where you are coming from when we're talking about business owners just trying to raise a family but with that said, think about this scenario...

Is it fair that a rap artist should be so wealthy that they can be irresponsible and materialistic by having a dozen vehicles and multiple homes while a surgeon, for example, who saves lives won't even come close to that kind of money? Not to mention a doctor will have expensive student loans that will need to be paid.

And to think that I feel guilty when I throw away food on my plate that I can't finish knowing that there are people in 3rd world countries that would love to have those left overs.

Wealth in this country almost seems to come more from "luck" rather than "hard work" unfortunetely....("who ya know or who ya blow" or if you're born into a wealthy family and much is handed down to you). Maybe taking more from the MEGA wealthy to give the middle class man a break is a good way to "balance" that unfairness in our society.

It all comes down to 1 word BALANCE!...plain and simple!

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


You're still citing articles from three or four years ago.

The bottom line is Starbucks got into trouble BEFORE Obama was elected, they've recovered now and are expanding in the U.S. and the Starbucks situation has nothing to show about the possible negatives of four more years of Obama.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Originally posted by Battleline
reply to post by neo96

 

If you don't agree with the progressive socialist running the country now you will, they don't debate facts they just ridicule people that don't agree with them.
This is what you get from people that hate and anger is a part of there everyday life to the people that diagree with them and have facts to back up what they say, they call everyone liers first and start in on your list after that.
There is no compromise, its there way or you are all the things on your list as I'm sure you have found out answering the ridacule and hate you have no doubt experienced here on your thread.

Good luck with this and the next four years.

This is an incredibly ironic post. Thanks for the vitriol for those whom you disagree with.

CJ

"Vitriol with whom I disagree with" ? You prove my point very well, no debate about where I may be wrong, just a rude comment.
Why bother with a comment at all unless I have come to close to a truth you can't deal with.

You have a nice day CJ

Jeez talk about crying like a baby.

Look Neo. Be a dam man! If someone tries to tell you something which isn't true, grow a pair an.d stop crying.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by WeAreAWAKE


"Here I am, busting my ass, working two jobs, waking up at 2AM to do computer work then going to my regular job at 8AM for 8 hours. I could just be equal and take a break. I think my neighbor makes more than I do so I can take some of his money. Not me myself...that would be theft. But if the government does it for me, then everything is just fine."

So you're saying that you aren't very good at much, right? Why would anyone need two jobs if they were skilled at something? It couldn't be because the people have allowed the "job creators" too much control . . .

Whether you like it or not it isn't your fault the economy failed, it isn't my fault the economy failed, and it isn't the " liberal" or the "conservative" citizens' fault that the economy failed. That blame falls on two groups; the U.S. "government" and big business men with personal interests but those are pretty much the same group aren't they...

No "skilled" person should have to work two jobs in the first place, especially in a time when many can't even find one job.

Personally I like the idea of a 40 hour work week thing that my parents keep saying the U.S. used to have...
One of our many problems is that a person is expected to work 70-90 hours. You could cut that time in half and makes tons of jobs. For every person who works more than 70 hours in a week we would have 1 new job. Where's the harm in that? People get a chance to actually "live" and others get a chance to... well "live" as well because they would then be earning the money required to do so and not relying on the government to support them. That would be one of the very many things we should to in order to get us closer to a win-win for everyone. Too bad most Americas are too stupid to see how that would be a good thing... I mean why have two jobs when you can make one slave do it all?

You whine about liberals being lazy... Well I agree that a large portion of liberals are lazy, hell, it's unfair to make such a claim because in our society the fact is simply that the majority of people are lazy. If we're to believe the popular vote then we can't claim that the vast majority are liberal... it would seem to be kind of close. Which can only mean that the majority of liberals AND conservatives in America are lazy. A statement that I would never disagree with.

A liberal person could honestly make the claim that conservatives are whiny. You know, whining, that thing you're doing right now. But such a claim would also be unfair because liberals are equally as whiny.

What we have here is a fact; the majority of Americans, regardless of political opinion, are whiny and lazy.

And that would be our problem.