All You Really Need To Know

[onmyknees]

Between now and November 2012 literally billions will spent by both parties to elect the next President. They'll be thousands of speeches and hundreds of commercials. What a waste of time and money. I could sum it all up for the undecides in a 3 minute You Tube clip about leadership, honesty, integrity and the patriotic duties of the our executive to make the difficult choices . When the President submits a budget that his own party won't even bring up for a vote in the Senate for fear of embarrassment ( the last one was defeated 93-0) and the Treasury Secretary admits they have no plan, it might be time to send these pikers packing. They're simply not up to the task.





Tim Geithner to Paul Ryan: "We don't have a definitive solution... We just don't like yours" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29X6Wm0J1Q&feature=relmfu)

[thx1138]

As it stands now there is NO solution to the debt crisis as long as US remains in the role of world policeman. A few months ago the Debt/GDP ratio was 100 percent. Today it's a 101 percent. No cuts in spending will take place until 2013 at the earliest and thus adding another trillion worth of debt in the interim. Now rising oil prices are going to make economic conditions much much worse so expect standards of lving to decline. The prudent person should start preparing for this. As for voting it's a waste of time and energy.

[buttslinger]

Money talks, bullshit walks. Check the Vegas odds on the Elections. Republicans afraid of what Obama's going to do next term? BE AFRAID!!!!



http://www.politicalbettingodds.com/2012-us-presidential-election-odds.html

[yodajazz]

I agree that difficult choices need to be made. But I dont see either party willing to make much of them. How about conducting wars and cutting taxes at the same time? In the past people understood, war meant sacrifice. We asked some to sacrifice their lives and well being, and told others to go shopping. For me I like the conservative views a lot less, that the 'liberal' or Decmocrats. Protecting the richest, no matter who else suffers, seems to be the centerpiece of the conservative/Republican economic solution.

Part of the long term solution is to increase revenues, by raising taxes on proportionally on those who can afford it the most, the wealthiest. And acutally asking everyone to sacrifce some is the the best sollution of all. I still say that Social Security money is a trememdous communtiy level support generator. So too drastic cuts in SS will have very negative impact, form the bottom on up.

[onmyknees]

I agree that difficult choices need to be made. But I dont see either party willing to make much of them. How about conducting wars and cutting taxes at the same time? In the past people understood, war meant sacrifice. We asked some to sacrifice their lives and well being, and told others to go shopping. For me I like the conservative views a lot less, that the 'liberal' or Decmocrats. Protecting the richest, no matter who else suffers, seems to be the centerpiece of the conservative/Republican economic solution.

Part of the long term solution is to increase revenues, by raising taxes on proportionally on those who can afford it the most, the wealthiest. And acutally asking everyone to sacrifce some is the the best sollution of all. I still say that Social Security money is a trememdous communtiy level support generator. So too drastic cuts in SS will have very negative impact, form the bottom on up.


You're not an unfair guy Yoda, but we were given a roadmap from Obama's much ballyhooed debt commission....( Bowles- Simpson) They put some of the best thinkers in a room for 6 months, from both parties and provided some concrete steps to put us on a road to spending controls and tax fairness.

Google Obama /Bowles Simpson and see if you can find the number of times he's referrenced his own debt commission after they released thier findings. The answer is ZERO.

You can confiscate 90% of the earnings of "wealthy people" ( Obama defines them as making greater than 250K) and it won't make even a minor dent in the debt. It's the biggest red herring in an administration that takes demagoguery to a whole new level. Make some modest adjustments to entitlements, and STOP FUCKING SPENDING. This isn't complicated, but appearently it's too complicated for Geitner and Obama. You heard him in his own words say they don't have a plan. I'm not asking you to believe me....but please believe him.

[yodajazz]

The subject of increased revenue vs decreased spending has been debated numerous times before here. Obviously, both would help towards decreasing debt. As far as decreasing spending, that's not the problem convincing people, left and right; it's what things should be cut. I'm against medicare cuts that would increase out of pocket costs, to the elderly, especially if others are not sacrificing. However, it does seem to me that drug companies are doing pretty well, consdering all the marketing they are able to afford. Doesn't seem like there are many proposed cuts, by closing military bases, and other military spending? I'm sure where conservatives stand on this item. I'm one who believes there is such thing as a peace dividend. How much will really be gained, vs how much harm it is, to cut someone who receives $55 in food stamps, like a friend, I know? So in other words where are these spending cuts coming from?

[trish]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/27/opinion/krugman-what-ails-europe.html

[onmyknees]

The subject of increased revenue vs decreased spending has been debated numerous times before here. Obviously, both would help towards decreasing debt. As far as decreasing spending, that's not the problem convincing people, left and right; it's what things should be cut. I'm against medicare cuts that would increase out of pocket costs, to the elderly, especially if others are not sacrificing. However, it does seem to me that drug companies are doing pretty well, consdering all the marketing they are able to afford. Doesn't seem like there are many proposed cuts, by closing military bases, and other military spending? I'm sure where conservatives stand on this item. I'm one who believes there is such thing as a peace dividend. How much will really be gained, vs how much harm it is, to cut someone who receives $55 in food stamps, like a friend, I know? So in other words where are these spending cuts coming from?

How about an across the board....all departments, all agencies real ( not base line budgeting) cut of 7%. If a cabinet secratary can't ring out 7% waste in a budget of billions, he should be greeting customers at Wal-Mart . Or...reduce spending to 2008 levels. Again....take Paul Ryans plan, or Simpson /Bowles or Dominichi/Rivlen.....but you seem not to understand the guy has no desire to cut....none.

[Faldur]

How about an across the board....all departments, all agencies real ( not base line budgeting) cut of 7%. If a cabinet secratary can't ring out 7% waste in a budget of billions, he should be greeting customers at Wal-Mart . Or...reduce spending to 2008 levels. Again....take Paul Ryans plan, or Simpson /Bowles or Dominichi/Rivlen.....but you seem not to understand the guy has no desire to cut....none.

Your trying to explain fairness in hard times to a group of people who think when 50% of the people pay 100% of the bills.. thats equals fairness. And when they impose additional financial burden on the 50% paying all the bills and exclude themselves from the equation, that equals shared sacrifice. Good luck bud..

[buttslinger]

Let Karl Rove cut spending. Like he did last time.
Things will get better. Just like the last time Democrats were in charge.
Is Obama more of a commie than Hillary? Yes he is. Hey, Sarah Palin-SUCK ON IT!!!!

[buttslinger]

The middle class pays for EVERYTHING! Coca-Cola doesn't pay taxes, all the people who drink coke do. The fat cats don't work 40,000 hours a week to get their paycheck. 1,000 middle class workers do. The financial health of the USA is directly dependant on the financial health of the middle class. The people who actually work for a living. When you buy food, you pay taxes. When you go to the movies, you pay taxes. When 10 mexicans pay rent -they pay taxes. If paying 15% on capital gains will save the US, then let's mail every fat cat $10 from our paychecks and they'll save us. Right?
FEED the MIDDLE CLASS and everyone will get well.

[trish]

Your trying to explain fairness in hard times to a group of people who think when 50% of the people pay 100% of the bills.. thats equals fairness. And when they impose additional financial burden on the 50% paying all the bills and exclude themselves from the equation, that equals shared sacrifice. Good luck bud..How many times does that myth have to be debunked before you'll stop regurgitating it?

Here's a program we can cut: the Bush tax break for the wealthy. Remember when we had a fucking surplus? Remember how Gore campaigned on keeping it in a lock box for social security, because it was largely the accumulated gains paid by the revenues collected from working men and women? It was a ten year surplus. Bush said it belongs to the American people and he was going to give it back...to the wealthy...in tax breaks. He also gave it to the oil companies, spent a lot of in the Middle East and eventually had to borrow from China. Enough already with the Bush tax cuts. We can't pay for them anymore. Time for the wealthy to pull their own weight. Job creators my ass.

[onmyknees]

How many times does that myth have to be debunked before you'll stop regurgitating it?

Here's a program we can cut: the Bush tax break for the wealthy. Remember when we had a fucking surplus? Remember how Gore campaigned on keeping it in a lock box for social security, because it was largely the accumulated gains paid by the revenues collected from working men and women? It was a ten year surplus. Bush said it belongs to the American people and he was going to give it back...to the wealthy...in tax breaks. He also gave it to the oil companies, spent a lot of in the Middle East and eventually had to borrow from China. Enough already with the Bush tax cuts. We can't pay for them anymore. Time for the wealthy to pull their own weight. Job creators my ass.


Speak of Myths.....my goodness where to start. First of all......all those surpluses you tout so proudly...we had a Republican Congress...Ok so you want to tax the wealthy. Do you exempt small business filing as individuals? What is your threshold for wealthy and how high should they be taxed? How many buffoons like Warren Buffet do you really think are out there.....( ya know...the guys that take their salary in capitol gains, then lament they're not being taxed enough.....) and how soon until they start moving money either off shore, or into shelters? They didn't get rich by letting the government rape them. You can call in unpatriotic....Obama would, but do you think they care about that? If they're paying 50% in State, Federal, and local taxes, my guess is they think that's quite enough patriotism. So you want to blame Bush and go back to some of the things he's done....fair enough. How about Obama's last budget getting voted down 93-0 and the Senate with no budget at all. Think the ship is a tad rudderless? Ok...so Bush gave the oil companies tax breaks. That has a direct correlation to the price at the pump. Obama gives breaks to Green Energy and GM....where's my benefit in any of that? If you want to talk about tax simplification and lowering the rates and eliminating some of the deductions....well you'll have an audience, but if you want to keep this broken system and just keep raising the marginal rates...good luck, it's not happening anytime soon. It really astounds me that otherwise thinking people think we can tax our way out of this when every country in Europe has tried exactly that. How many times should one bang his head into a wall before you get it? OK...want to recapture some of the Bush deficits? Let's repeal the prescription drug plan for seniors...that's a start. Oh wait we can't touch that because that's an entitlement. Your problem Trish??? You never mentioned spending once in your post. Case Closed.

[Gouki]

Tim Geithner SMH

[buttslinger]

You Republicans have valid points. But I immediately see three glaring problems with your position.
1) George W. Bush
2) John McCain
3) Mitt Romney

[buttslinger]

People say money doesn't buy happiness. Except, according to a new study from Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School, it sort of does — up to about $75,000 a year. The lower a person's annual income falls below that benchmark, the unhappier he or she feels. But no matter how much more than $75,000 people make, they don't report any greater degree of happiness.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2019628,00.html#ixzz1nkM5uzcb

[trish]

Ok...so Bush gave the oil companies tax breaks. That has a direct correlation to the price at the pump.Gas prices at the pump rose just as much under Bush. Apparently giving the oil companies a break didn't help any. The big drop, by the way, was due to Bush's Great Recession. People out of work and production offline meant diminished demand. Diminished demand equates to diminished prices. Conservation could bring about a similar decline. The fact the gas prices are back up to where they were before the recession simply means that demand is back up. Production and consumer confidence are up and the economy is recovering. Of course if you want to see those prices crash again, just implement a severe austerity program with tax breaks for the wealthy and no government safety net for the out of work. Demand will nosedive and your precious gas prices will plummet again. (The chart is from gasbuddy.com )

[yodajazz]

Gas prices at the pump rose just as much under Bush. Apparently giving the oil companies a break didn't help any. The big drop, by the way, was due to Bush's Great Recession. People out of work and production offline meant diminished demand. Diminished demand equates to diminished prices. Conservation could bring about a similar decline. The fact the gas prices are back up to where they were before the recession simply means that demand is back up. Production and consumer confidence are up and the economy is recovering. Of course if you want to see those prices crash again, just implement a severe austerity program with tax breaks for the wealthy and no government safety net for the out of work. Demand will nosedive and your precious gas prices will plummet again. (The chart is from gasbuddy.com )

That's an interesting chart. However if you look at the big drop, it was not because people simply stopped driving (demand). Think about it. What happened was that the financial market collapsed. There was no money to speculate/invest on gas (oil). I'm not an expert on financial markets, but I am a logical thinker. On can infer from the results. People who held oil futures, probably sold (dumped) it at a low price in order to get immediate cash, since thier real estate holdings were going down the drain. Also less money was out there for other investors to purchase their oil futures holdings.

It is very important politically for the public not to associate gas prices, with the financial market sector. Or else they might come to understand that the wealthy have other options to gain wealth besides, creating jobs.

Lets look at the high price of gas today. When a news event takes place, such as, the media saying that Iran may not make its oil available to certain parts of the world market, then potential market investors, think that the oil price may spike in the future. So they then purchase oil futures immediately, which drives the price up quickly. The possible crisis event does not even have to take place. I have seen things such an OPEC price raise, make prices jump over night. If it was just a matter of passing along extra oil costs to the consumer, there should be a lag before prices increased. But of course, I'm not saying the oil demand does not have some effect prices, either. I believe oil, as a speculative commodity, has a much greater impact on pump prices than is generally understood.

[trish]

Thanks for your input and the sane spirit in which it's offered. You have a legitimate point, as speculators are a major force in the oil market. I tend to think the chart reflects both demand and the effects of speculation. The latter will amplify the effects of demand but may also be driven by other issues and concerns political and economic. Your interpretation is in harmony with the observation that the recession is not yet over for working Americans, but for those with money the echos of the recession are no longer a deterrent to speculation. I'm not an economist either and I wouldn't want to conjecture on how much the chart reflects the "whims" of speculators or the demand for gasoline.

What I am certain of is the chart clearly exposes the argument that goes "Gas prices were $1.65/gal at the start of Obama's term and his policies drove them up to $4.00/gal." While the $1.65 figure is correct, it is also an obvious fluke...an artifact of the recession. No matter who might have won the last election, in no alternative universe would the post-recession prices ever be anywhere near $1.65/gal. The argument beautifully demonstrates a favorite weapon in every liar's arsenal: the logical fallacy of cherry picking the data.

[thx1138]

What's going to happen is the US is going to default. It won't be called a default though (too destabilizing). The treasury will offer T bill holders a swap - new bonds with 50 percent of the value of the old bonds. (like Greece). And if you don't like it you'll get diddley squat.

[buttslinger]

I have relatives down on the gulf, they're all Republicans, if I lived down there I'd be a Republican too. Probably over the last century it's been split 50/50 Republican/Democrat. President, congress, Supreme Court.
With OBAMACARE, the country will have healthcare and social security, FOREVER. Thats why the Republicans are so afraid. Once people get used to it, it will be impossible to get rid of. So no matter who holds the keys to the vault, there won't be any money for Republicans to steal. It will all be allocated to the American PEOPLE.
The economy will recover no matter who's in charge. Rush Limbaugh will continue to be a bloated windbag. Dog will still eat dog. A nuclear holocaust will eventually erase civilization. George W Bush will go down in History as the man who gave us PRESIDENT Barack H Obama.

[buttslinger]

I believe Donald Trump was actually the republican frontrunner for President at one time! Check out the First Lady.

[buttslinger]

You won't hear either side say this, but the greatest generation has come and gone. The days when Mom stayed home with the five kids are over. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there are plenty of insiders that know pretty much exactly how things are going to play out, and the question for the future is do we individually steal as much cash as we can now for our friends and family, or do we nationally split up whats in the pot for as many people as possible. The United States has never known what's it's like to be on the downhill side. And I'm not saying we're a San Andreas Fault Disaster away from total bankruptcy. I'm sure we'll come out of this downturn. But even the Republicans are having doubts about Big Business saving the USA. Our own weight is finally slowing things down.