The Day Greece got it, Scott Walker, Mr. Austerity America announced

a reply to: Dfairlite

Well, if it is just math, put a 0 there. Why drag it on for a hundred years when it is fixed easily. I think the Greek people are spot on.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Dfairlite

Well, if it is just math, put a 0 there. Why drag it on for a hundred years when it is fixed easily. I think the Greek people are spot on.

Two reasons: First, just because it's math doesn't mean there is nothing of value behind the math.
Second, that wouldn't fix the problem. Greece is used to living beyond what they can afford, they have to have a change in lifestyle. Take a look at the amount of debt people get in after they consolidate their debt. Why is that? Because the bad behavior hasn't been fixed, just a symptom of the bad behavior has been masked.

These bailouts are basically debt consolidation but with some stipulations on behavior changes. The creditors are trying to spark the change, but the people of greece don't want to change. They're comfortable. Grexit is inevitable imo. and best for everyone, including Greece.

a reply to: Dfairlite

So, why do they keep giving them a bailout if the greek people do not want to change?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Dfairlite

So, why do they keep giving them a bailout if the greek people do not want to change?

Well, that's a little bit of speculation. I think it's because the EU leaders don't want to admit the EU is a failure and that's what they basically would be doing by allowing a grexit. But if you look at it, Germany, finland, and a few other countries don't want to give greece any more money. Greece doesn't want any more money if it means more austerity. (which is kind of ironic because no more money would be massive austerity).
So, given those facts, I don't really understand why they keep giving them money other than the ego's of EU leaders.

a reply to: Dfairlite
Sorry but government spending has nothing in common with household expenditure. Government income is directly related to economic (tax generating) activity. That economic activity is directly related to government expenditure. Attempts to reduce government expenditure when economy is in as poor a state as Greece's are all but inevitably self defeating as they will just crash the economy even further and reduce tax revenues.
As counter intuitive as it may seem the only way Greece is ever going to recover is by spending more. While in the Euro its ability to do this its self is now effectively removed therefore the need for the EU to step in.
The alternative is to condemn an entire nation within the EU to years of poverty. If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then what's the point of it at all?
The proposal is not in anyway for the benefits of Greece. It is just another bailout for too big to fail financial institutions.

I see a lot in this thread about Greece and economic theory but not much about Scott Walker. As a Wisconsin native I can tell you he is the freaking last man you want for your president. He has literally brought the state to its knees as any state ranking will tell you. His latest brilliant idea was to cut $300 million from the University system. Probably because he knows he needs an even stupider populace to keep electing people like him. He's a big fan of taking on menaces to society like teachers., health care workers, first responders, and the like because who needs people like that amirite?

He shot down a project for a high speed railway system that would connect Madison and Milwaukee (and eventually Chicago and the Twin Cities) that would have brought the state hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of jobs. Also costing other states a bunch of money.

And now he somehow has the stones to think he should be President. LOL. You all better make an offering to whatever God or spaghetti monster you cherish to help make sure that doesn't happen.

originally posted by: Malynn
He shot down a project for a high speed railway system that would connect Madison and Milwaukee (and eventually Chicago and the Twin Cities) that would have brought the state hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of jobs. Also costing other states a bunch of money.

Rail is a tough one. It works well in Japan and Europe but those nations or groups of nations in the case of Europe are much more compact than the US is. The US is very rural compared to most of the developed world and the per foot cost of rail is astronomical, it also cannot be run at a profit in the US because of this high upfront and maintenance cost. Roads are simply more efficient here.

There's only one form of light rail that can possibly work in the US at this point and that's a transcontinental high speed maglev system. They have a low maintenance cost because there's no point of contact to wear down and are very fast capable of traveling at 1500 mph, you could go from NY to LA under such a system in a mere 2 hours. Normal rail costs about $200 million per mile, and a maglev system costs around $500 million. Which is the reason we don't have either system, it's simply too expensive.

Lets take the Madison to Milwaukee example, you're talking about 80 miles, even if you can do it on the cheap for half the cost per mile (which has it's own issues) you're talking about an $8 billion project. Then, if the project is successful you take people off the roads which makes road maintenance more difficult. It's just not worth it.

When it comes to university funding, I'm pretty ambivalent. If the state/feds are subsidizing costs, everyone pays through taxes, if they're funded less the students pay. Either way over a lifetime it's the same money going into the system and it's coming from largely the same people (goto college and make more, and you would be a higher income earner and taxed more). I think this one is a do nothing change.

a reply to: Aazadan

I vehemently disagree on both points. In this horrible economic system we've decided to use it takes money to make money. Sometimes you need to spend for progress and a better life for your people. And investing in education is never bad.

originally posted by: Malynn
a reply to: Aazadan

I vehemently disagree on both points. In this horrible economic system we've decided to use it takes money to make money. Sometimes you need to spend for progress and a better life for your people. And investing in education is never bad.

But that's just the thing, you're not investing in education. If you can afford to go to college the difference between it costing 100k or 50k for a degree matters very little. The real investment in education comes in the form of grants and scholarships to students who couldn't normally afford to attend. As far as I'm aware that's not what's being talked about here, rather Walker has been focusing on how much of the various universities operating budgets the state is willing to subsidize. We have a similar issue here in Ohio, particularly since 2008 where the state massively cut how much money it is giving the schools.

When it comes to rail, like I said I would love to have a rail system in the US there are a lot of benefits to doing so. But one of the biggest challenges in the US with any infrastructure is that we're a fairly rural population and that drastically increases the costs while limiting the benefits of any infrastructure. You can see the other extremes of this in Russia and South Korea, we lean closer to Russia in population density and that's a big factor in what types of infrastructure we can efficiently build. Over 50% of the US can't even operate a bus system that's capable of breaking even because of population density.

a reply to: Aazadan

Again, I disagree. A fast system that goes between Milwaukee, Chicago, Madison, and the Twin Cities would be heavily used. Especially in winter. The populations of these areas are huge and people from more rural areas would also travel to use it. When you see "cost to maintain" I see more potential jobs for Wisconsin residents.

As far as investment in education is concerned the results states like Minnesota have achieved would seem to prove you wrong. There is a state with a governor who knows what is up.

Oh, and another of the many reasons to despise Scott Walker is he opposes the Scotus decision on gay marriage and made a statement that the Boyscout organization's ban of gay members "protects children".

a reply to: harddrive21

I completely agree...

Not much I can do but prepare and I am.


Unfortunately, the USA is playing a different game. We go down we take everyone with us. It's not right either.

originally posted by: Malynn
a reply to: Aazadan

Again, I disagree. A fast system that goes between Milwaukee, Chicago, Madison, and the Twin Cities would be heavily used. Especially in winter. The populations of these areas are huge and people from more rural areas would also travel to use it. When you see "cost to maintain" I see more potential jobs for Wisconsin residents.

As far as investment in education is concerned the results states like Minnesota have achieved would seem to prove you wrong. There is a state with a governor who knows what is up.

Oh, and another of the many reasons to despise Scott Walker is he opposes the Scotus decision on gay marriage and made a statement that the Boyscout organization's ban of gay members "protects children".

It would be used, the problem is paying for it. There's not one single public transit system in the US that's self sufficient, for that matter there's not a single one in the world. The costs to ride only cover a portion of their operating expenses while taxpayer money fully funds their construction and a chunk of their operating budget. These types of systems are great for the populace but they are not free and they aren't even revenue neutral. I would love it if this weren't the case, and I think a sufficiently well built maglev system can one day be cost effective but it requires several initiatives beyond simply building the rail system as well as some technological advances that don't yet exist.

originally posted by: WUNK22
Koch brothers Koch brothers Koch brothers ugggggggggg! Ever here of George Soros? Is your side of America doing good? Here in NY the malls look abandoned, 70% empty at this point. Gas last night was $3.20 a gallon. I personally owned 5stores and employed 20/25 people at any given time. Now I'm working out of a van with one other guy, all within 6years. I would vote for a gallon of paint to be president then anymore democrat union thugs!

Venting complete! Thank you

your side your side your side uggggggggg! Is either sides money helping the system? Is there a side paying you? what interest do you have in defending people with money paying for their agendas to be supported. How on earth does it benefit you?

a reply to: Aazadan

Hmmmm......didn't the US citizens, farmers, ranchers, native americans give the RR the land that their rails sit on. From sea to shining sea. And now that land just sits there with dead rail cars rotting away.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Aazadan

Hmmmm......didn't the US citizens, farmers, ranchers, native americans give the RR the land that their rails sit on. From sea to shining sea. And now that land just sits there with dead rail cars rotting away.

Highways, automobiles, and airplanes weren't what they are today when we used to have a real rail system in the US. There's still a little bit of rail traffic but for the most part it's just not viable anymore. It also has much higher upfront construction costs today because you're not just stringing some rail along the ground but generally making it a subway system.

originally posted by: grandmakdwCan anyone honestly figure a way not to go into austerity at this point?

Oh, that's easy...

Repeal the Federal Reserve Act, declare the bankers traitors and outlaws, seize all of their assets possible, and hange the ones you can find.

Yeah, I'll hold my breath while waiting for that to happen...