The Tea Party...Why are they so Dangerous?

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   

marg6043
reply to post by XPLodER
 


You mean the economic scam most be perpetuated for the common good even if our nation keep sinking into debt oblivion. Right? I got it now. You know you can put a band aid on a wound for so long until the gaping hole causes death by untreated injury. Totally preventable but ignored.



i would suggest watching this video,

and you annology is like this,

if a person was born with a tiny tumor(interest) that grew twice as fast as the person would eventually be killed by the tumor,(interest)
the death comes from the fact the tumor (interest)was always there, it was only visable when the person grew large.

xploder
edit on 18/10/13 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by XPLodER
 


So because we are being duped further and further into debt, it is all good because it grows the economy? But we shouldn't fix this deception because it will break the economy? Armageddon is a pretty strong word for what would happen if the economy had a contraction, especially since you have no idea what will happen if it does. I do know one thing though, the economy that would grow out of the result of our economy crashing would be much stronger and healthier than the one we have now.


you havent watched the you tube vid have you?
it explains very simply how the system works,
and why raising the debt ceiling had to happen in a system the relies on expansive debt.

if you hate debt you actually hate the debt system, not the amount of debt.

take every dollar in the usa and pay off every debt,
YOU NOW HAVE NO MONEY TO USE AS CAPITAL

end game
over

xploder



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


You might be right. I went to Public Schools.

I just see that debt clock spiraling completely out of control.


We are 17 trillion in debt. This is the best they can do?

I would submit that if we let children take over the Nation's finances.

They could get within 17 trillion. There is no excuse for this debt.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Please tell me how having a "rich country" full of poor individuals is a good thing? Because that is the end result.....


instead of fixating on the "debt amount"
look at the debt system,

IT LITERATELY HAS TO EXPAND TO CONTINUE
your entire system is predicated on expansion,
if it stops = collapse

i dont like debt based money, it is the root cause of your deficit spending,
and THE CAUSE of your debt.

please watch the video


ever wonder why there was no talk of the fed closing down with the rest of government?

xploder



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


First can you stop reposting that video? Discounting the many times you've posted it in this thread, you are like the 3rd or 4th person today who has posted it in a thread. I'm tired of people telling me to watch it. I know how the banking system works by the way. I've watched many other videos here on ATS explaining how our fractional reserve banking system works. I've also taken AP economics in high school and macro economics in college. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I'm sure that video won't tell me anything I don't already know.

But your premise is saying that we have a cancerous growth that is growing and growing and growing. Removing it at this point would require INTENSE surgery that may or may not kill us. But you advocate just living with it until it does kill us, because you fear the surgery to remove it (disregarding the fact that if it doesn't kill us we'd be healthier than ever). If it were me, I'd opt for the surgery. At least if I die its on my terms and the benefits if it succeed are just way better than living with it. Especially since it will kill you eventually anyways.

ETA: One more thing. I'm Libertarian, one of our important party platforms is ending the Fed.
edit on 18-10-2013 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by whyamIhere
 


Hi whyamIhere,

It's called "ideas" and unless you conform to mainstream beliefs, your individual "ideas" are dangerous. You are not meaningful to the state unless you are one of them. The Tea Party is "new" and they don't appreciate that, as you do. The government is a "good ole boys club" The Tea Party isn't invited. Therefore they are the uninvited, and dangerous to the system of which the "good ole boys" are currently getting wealthy.

Ron Paul also has "ideas" and he is one of the most dangerous individuals speaking out.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   

AlienScience

To answer your question from the title...they are dangerous because they are stupid. Blunt, yes, but it is the truth. They don't understand economics, they think big numbers are bad and will attempt to burn the whole damn thing down due to their lack of knowledge.



Ah, AlienScience you never fail to disappoint.

Let's see what that Right Wing rag the New York Times has to say.......



Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.


New York Times/CBS Poll

Interactive Guide to the Poll

I should try and critique each point you made but it's not worth the effort. You be governed by your Ranchers who tell you when to eat, sleep and do everything. After all, they know what you should do better than you, right?



edit on 18-10-2013 by pavil because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-10-2013 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


" they think big numbers are bad" especially if its on your open health files,, for everyone too see.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Thanks for the info. And while I may be a few fries short of a Happy Meal, I don't see how just a reduction in spending would ever hurt the delicate system. If anything, it would secure this scheme and protect against the potential for inflation.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


Don't make it sound like that was my quote.....attribute to the person that deserves credit.......AS



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by AlienScience
 


I clicked on this thread to learn more about the tea party so I have a couple of question.

Why would the US be broke if we did not have a deficit?

Also - why do you believe people are stupid and in need of a huge government to run their lives?

Genuinely curious - not rhetorical questions.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   

pavil
reply to post by BobAthome
 


Don't make it sound like that was my quote.....attribute to the person that deserves credit.......AS



opps eye aint what it used too be.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   

beezzer
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Thanks for the info. And while I may be a few fries short of a Happy Meal, I don't see how just a reduction in spending would ever hurt the delicate system. If anything, it would secure this scheme and protect against the potential for inflation.


I think the whole problem is how people have come to equate Government and the nation as one in the same. Our nation does require expansion. I forget what the number works out to, but xx number of additional jobs need to be created each month just to have a true 'break even' because of the nonstop flow of new people into the workforce from all sources.

What doesn't need to expand and needs to shrink before anything else CAN expand IS Government. When folks mentally divorce Government from Nation as interdependent to the point of suicide pact, we might get something accomplished, eh?



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


But but... Obama says we need to add 30 million illegal immigrants to our workforce. Surely the jobs are there right???



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


i always get nervous,,

I think the whole problem is how people have come to equate Government and the nation as one in the same. Our nation does require expansion.

expansion.,,or,,
as he said,,,

The German Nazi Party claimed that Germany inevitably needed to .... road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space to new

no wonder the RUSSIANS are nervous.

qNbdWwQryS0



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000

beezzer
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Thanks for the info. And while I may be a few fries short of a Happy Meal, I don't see how just a reduction in spending would ever hurt the delicate system. If anything, it would secure this scheme and protect against the potential for inflation.


I think the whole problem is how people have come to equate Government and the nation as one in the same. Our nation does require expansion. I forget what the number works out to, but xx number of additional jobs need to be created each month just to have a true 'break even' because of the nonstop flow of new people into the workforce from all sources.

What doesn't need to expand and needs to shrink before anything else CAN expand IS Government. When folks mentally divorce Government from Nation as interdependent to the point of suicide pact, we might get something accomplished, eh?



I will agree that we need to expand.

But our expansion should be in the form of investments and jobs and not entitlements and welfare.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
What doesn't need to expand and needs to shrink before anything else CAN expand IS Government. When folks mentally divorce Government from Nation as interdependent to the point of suicide pact, we might get something accomplished, eh?


You are correct, there is only one "Pie" of our economy, if Government takes more of the pie, it leaves less for the private side of the economy, which is where the real growth and wealth of our Nation (to use your term) is created. Government doesn't create wealth or jobs, at least sustainable ones. All they do is take more income/capital away from the Private sector further slowing things down.


We'll Convert you sooner or later...... you think for yourself. That seems to be frowned on by some here. Go Figure.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Well, there do seem to be some schools of thought out there that believe just by adding able bodied workers to unemployment roles, already in what would be called chronic crisis by any other time period's standards, we expand the economy.

Given the fact that is the line of thought the overall leadership all over Washington seems determined to test? I suppose it won't be academic to debate much longer. We'll see without question which political philosophy was correct and which was a bit off the mark.

To be entirely honest? There is what I expect to see happen and there is what I would like to see happen. I'm an American. I don't want to see my nation and 300 million people inside it fail and fall into chaos without structure, after a lifetime being trained to nothing but structure.

So, in the purely pragmatic sense? I hope the plans being put in place DO work, while again noting that what I fully expect to happen in reality just isn't the same thing at all.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   

whyamIhere
reply to post by XPLodER
 


You might be right. I went to Public Schools.

I just see that debt clock spiraling completely out of control.


We are 17 trillion in debt. This is the best they can do?

I would submit that if we let children take over the Nation's finances.

They could get within 17 trillion. There is no excuse for this debt.


The US like a large company runs at a debt because payiing the intrest on the debt and borrowing money to increase over all results in a greater return. For example if you borrow money and build roads with it you will increase trade, jobs and your tax base resulting in more income and greater return than if you just paid your debt. Just like a company like say Walrmart buys everything on credit and then sells it at a profit and then borrows more to build more stores and more to fill those stores etc. instead of stopping and paying off the original debt because over all in the long run the it is better for over all profits. It is the same reason we do not just sell off some minral rights to pay off the debt. Because in the long run increase in the amount of money we will get for those rights down the road is far more if with with increasing debt and the resulting interest then it would be to just pay it off. Along with debt increasing down the road the result of that debt is more income. Now when your added debt comes from something like the wars in Iraq and Afganistan your going to see a net loss. The only you can do is end the wars and the money that was funding them.



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   
So am I to conclude a third party is dead from the start?

Is it just a magnet for the cast offs of the Main Stream?

Disappointing for Independent's craving anything different.





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join


Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant
read more: Ora.TV's Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant