economics 101

[jvcstone]

Anyone up for a bi-partisan economic discussion?

http://my.earthlink.net/article/bus?guid=20061028/4542d5c0_3ca6_1552620061028-507513429

Interesting read if your eyes don't glaze over.

JVC

[Sponsored Links]

[John Bridge]

Read the article, John. The guy won't get any argument from me. ;)

[tileguytodd]

No arguments here either..........thats one of the things wrong with our system..........you get a president into office who says...

"all we gotta do is cook them books for four years and then its the next guys problem"

Presidents advisers....."Sure, But what if you get re-elected"

President - "Well, we oughta be pretty good at it by then and all we gotta do is hang on for four years and its the next guys problem"
;)

[Eugenius]

Nancy Pelosi is a 'sure fire solution'. She is so bi-partisan. :devil2:
It's said that Republicans and Democrats have suffered a 'disconnect'. A 'disconnect' is repararable . However..,
Pelosi, Reed and other leading Democrats don't seek to disconnect and transfer allegience but rather to destroy. Their goal is not the good of all but personal power. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".

[jvcstone]

Sure, Eugenius, it looks like the power pendulum is swinging back to the donkey side. Republicans have had it for a while now, and still haven't managed to do anything constructive with it. But the point is that all professional politicians are interested in amassing as much power as possible, at the expense of our country's future.

Whats refreshing about Mr. Walker and his speech is that he is in a position that can't be twisted by politics, and he puts the looming problem right where it started, and right where it has to be fixed. Question is, is any politician looking more to re-election than to grappling with difficult and unpopular problems willing to step forward and actually say the King has no clothes??? Don't think so!!!, and it really is becoming worrisome

Term limits, in my opinion is the only way the people can take back Washington and start to fix our government, followed by a lot of other legislative reforms that just might result in some actual work getting done up there.

JVC

[Scooter]

I think most Democrats have been on the "pay as you go" program for at least a decade. You may call that "tax and spend". But it's least pay as you go. You may criticize Nancy Pelosi all you want with phrases and the like, but if you check her web site and her voting record, I think she has been for more fiscally responsible budget management.

What this means, in my book, is if you have a war, then raise taxes to pay for it. If you want a Medicare plan, thats fine, then raise taxes to pay for it. If you want a Border Wall, thats great, figure out a way to pay for it.

One of the reasons that this stupid war has been going on so long is that none of us really feel the pain of the war. I mean we read about 100 dead this month, thats terrible, but we as a Nation have to step up to the bar and pay for this abortion, not foist it on another President or generation. The "absolute power" phrase is interesting--in a vacuum. There is only one group that has held "absolute power" for a decade--thats Newt Ginrich, Trist, Hassert and the like. They've held Congress in a lock since 1994, and couldn't fix this problem if their life depended upon it.

If this keeps up, we'll have to elect Bill or Hillary Clinton to balance the budget (again).

[LGB]

The illegal entitlement programs are the problem with this nation. I'd give up any social security benefit I'm entitled to if they would let me opt out...

FDR REALLY screwed us when he forced SS through congress and blackmailed the supreme court...

[jgleason]

Raising taxes is not the answer. cutting spending is the answer. You do know that even with GB's tax cuts for the rich that the feds revenue continues to go up year after year, right? Unfortunatley, so does spending. If you send a dollar to Washington, they'll spend it plus 10 percent. Starve the beast. :D

Ditto that sentiment on the entitlement programs LGB. Wealth redistribution schemes suck.

[tileguytodd]

Well we can start cutting spending by taking away some of those big washington congressmens salary's.... They make WAY too much money for people who average 100 days a year of work.
I'd love to have that kinda income and work 5 months of monday through fridays taking 7 months OFF

[jvcstone]

Yep, and while we're at it, do away with that obscene pension program they've developed for themselves. If congress was in the social security system, it would be fixed asap. I'm thinking that congressional pay should be performance based, and voted on by the people they supposedly represent.

JVC

[Scooter]

I have to roll around the floor laughing on this. See: :rofl:

Cutting Social Security. Right. Cutting the salaries of Congressmen. Right.

Like that is ever going to happen.

So pick another sacred cow, guys.

You're for a War? Pay for it.

You're for a Border Fence? Pay for it.

What would solve the budget crisis are elected officials that when they propose legislation, they are required to tell the American people how they are going to pay for the Bill they are proposing.

The real good thing about the Republican Congress of the 90's is they made Clinton answer those questions, and as a result of the two party system, and good President, we got some good bills out, that paid for themselves, and actually eliminated the deficet. The current group are bankrupting America--not for me--I'll be retired--but for your kids. Hope you like it.

[LGB]

Sacred to who Scooter? You do know how social security came into existance, don't you? Please tell us what part of the founding documents requires us to contribute 15% of our income into a ponzi scheme for our retirement.

[tileguytodd]

Cutting Social Security. Right. Cutting the salaries of Congressmen. Right.

Like that is ever going to happen.

I never said it would happen.........and it wont..........it would be nice to see some of our elected officials actually earn thier money however.
100 day average per year......thats like 14 weeks...........they work hard to get elected so they can go on vacation if they win :D :D :D

think about it, if they do 6 years in congress they work a total of 600 days
of 2,190 (or 4800 hours) while the 40 hour a week folks who elected them over 6 years average working 24,000 hours.
4800 hours of work nets them 6 years x 165,200.00 per year = 991,200.00
24,000 hours or 6 years x 40,000 per year = 240,000.00

Doesnt this appear to be just a little bit LOPSIDED!!!!

[jvcstone]

Yea Scooter, it makes me laugh too. I mentioned in another post that I had a serious pipe dream going on---that's what happens when I have too much time on my hands. Thing about dreams though is that if enough people start having the same dream, it can become reality. Fixing our broken government is a dream that needs to become real for the republic's survival.

Having the revenue bill attached to the spending bill is important. I learned a long time ago how easy it is to get in trouble if I don't pay as I go. We need to demand that same concept of our elected officials. And another thing that needs to stop is all those little amendments that get attached at the last minute making the amount of money being spent increase astronomically. The longer that a politician serves, the more power he/she amasses, and the less they think about the people who put them there. Term Limits , Term Limits, Term Limits. All this is part of the dream, and won't happen without a popular revolution of hearts and minds.

If my understanding of our government is correct, congress is supposed to represent the will of the people. Well, we the people apparently have relinquished that concept, and now the people get to support the will of power hungry professional politicians. The only viable solution is for the people to take back their government from the politicians who inhabit both sides of the congressional isle. Sure it's a dream, but I prefer it to the nightmare we currently have in DC. As long as the American public remains apathetic about their government to the point of more than half not even bothering to vote, we have the government we deserve. Too bad that it won't change, and too bad that we, like the old soviet union, seem bent on spending ourselves into oblivion.

JVC

[Scooter]

SS came about through legislation. I'm old, but I can't remember when it happened. I'd ask John Bridge, he would probaby remember.

Seriously, my understanding is that the Supreme Court already ruled that it was consitutional in Helvering v. Davis (1937) so my research disclosed. As far as "bribing" the S.Ct., I guess what the S.Ct. did in 2000 with Bush v Gore was bribing, too, eh? You know, as a Democracy, we delegate these calls to a Court and while you can complaint all you want, you have to move on. I know I have.

The fact is that you can complain about Social Security all you want, but the party that proposes getting rid of it won't be in power very long. I saw that two years ago when our glorious President proposed his stupid plan that went nowhere. Indeed, the more he went around the country and stumped for it, the lower his approval ratings got. The plan never even go so far as a Senator or Representative actually writing the legislation. It was DOA.

So complain about Social Security all you want--it is a fixture and a sacred cow. Get over it.

Now, if you want to talk reality, lets figure out how much extra taxes you should pay to fund Bush's war. It is now at generously calculated at $338.3 billion dollars, depending on whose counting. Thats about $3,000 per tax payer. Are you OK with that? Do you think its being spent wisely? Doesn't this dwarf the tax refund you got a couple years ago? When can we expect your check?

Thats just for the war. How about Medicare? The Border Fence? The new Homeland Security defense measures?

Do you think these spending programs are free?

[stullis]

"I'd love to have that kinda income and work 5 months of monday through fridays taking 7 months OFF"

Hey Todd, did your brother ever get elected? I know he was running for some type of office.

[Scooter]

You forgot the pension that Congress gets.

Even the child molester Foley will get his pension.

Its better than Social Security, thats for sure.

[LGB]

The supreme court shot down most of FDR's socialist plans until after the election of 1936. FDR won in a landslide victory and had control of both houses of congress. He made a proposal to "pack" all of the federal courts including adding 6 new liberal justices to the supreme court. Only after this threat did justice Owen Roberts start siding with FDR.To this day the game plan is still in effect. If they can't win on election day they try to do it in the courts. The dumbocrats are responsible for this mess we are in now. These entitlement programs are completely illegal and go against everything that made America great. It's gonna be our downfall and the blame can be laid squarely on the shoulders of FDR and the dumbocratic party...

[stullis]

Another for you to peruse. :)

www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/10/27/us-national-debt-over-the-last-50-years-graph/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.testing.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Fblog%2F2006%2F07%2F11%23debt&frame=true

[Scooter]

If they can't win on election day they try to do it in the courts.

I felt the same way about Bush going to Court and lobbying the right wing Supreme Court in 2000. :clap2:

Gore won Florida fair and square, and the US S.Ct. shoulda stayed out of that purely State issues. But that being said, life goes on and we have to accept defeat and move on. I have. You need to get over it--Jeez you weren't even alive then. Don't take it too seriously.

Social Security is not going to be the end of the free world. Baby Boomers like me will be dead and gone in 10-20 years, and the number curve will go down, and they'll be a surplus again like there was in the 50's through 80's. Most civilized countries have some form of Social Security, some more onerous than ours. They've survived and prospered.

[tileguytodd]

Hey Todd, did your brother ever get elected? I know he was running for some type of office.

No Scott he ran against Oberstar (30 year incumbant) Only way to beat him is if he died a week before the vote..............even then he'd probobly Win :D :D :D

Republican Party is grooming him for office however.........getting his name out there etc.
Since they changed the district maps around some the democrats arent quite as strong in this district as the Dynasty they once were.
In other words, now instead of 99 % they are closer to 70% :D

[Big AL]

3 things I'd like to mention: (these are ways to generate more revenue for the gov. The other side of the coin is spending and that will NEVER be controlled as long as you have rich lawyers acting as your elected officials. When was the last time we had a Speaker of the House who came from a plumber's background?)

Al's ways to increase gov revenues:
1) Who says there is anything wrong with taking Iraq's oil? If we are liberating them, they should pay for it. We should get all the damn oil we want for free. This will save the American people bunches of money on their personal incomes (which they would put back into the economy through greater spending freedom), and it will also pay for the war.
2) make marijuana legal. now don't go getting all funky on me. I am a Christian who likes to have a few brews, but am not for marijuana. However, I don't care if others wanna smoke the stuff, and i'd like our government to tax the crap out of it like they do marlboro lights. Imagine the jumpstart to the economy this would give. We have the farming infrastructure in place to grow it, and we have the abilitiy to get it distributed. The gov could license certain companies to carry it and certain stores to sell it. (like liquor)
3) flat tax. I am not rich by any means. To me, a rich person is someone making over $750,000 per year. My wife and I are far, far, far from that.
My Dad was a fireman and my Mom a school teacher. Together, they grossed just under $100,000 per year. We were not rich...but the dems would tax us as if we were.
let's all pay the same. That is fair.
Why should I pay more because I work hard, kiss ass, come up with new ideas, take personal risks....and end up making a good buck?