The Boehner/Cantor/Tea Party Fiscall Cliff #EpicFail

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by WTF

SS and Medicare ran a surplus for decades. It is the military that we have not taxed correctly for, we have taxed way less than wtf we spend on Defense.

Yes if taxes go up on everyone, the Tea Party will be blamed. Obama is in a sweet spot. The GOP will wind up raising taxes on people say making over 400k. If they are stupid enough to not make a deal before all taxes rise, it will hurt them in the mid term badly.

Originally Posted by markroxny

A majority of the country want's the rich to be taxed at a higher rate, even the ones who didn't vote for Obama.

He has a mandate, and he has the upper hand too, thanks to Boehner and the GOP clown show.

Yes we should spend less on defense. Otherwise your posts are completely screwed. You think by taxing 2% of the population at high rates as proposed by Obama (income >$200,000/year) or 0.12% of the population as proposed by Schumer and Pelosi (income > $1,000,000/year) you're going to close a $1 trillion deficit and pay for the retirement and medical care of Americans? It's not going to happen. The wealthy don't have enough money. Democrats are cynically pursuing a tax increase on the wealthy for political purposes. There's no way they can continue with big government, currently running over 40% of GDP if you include localities and states, without either (a) taxing EVERYONE at MUCH higher rates or (b) bankrupting the country, like Greece.

WTF, While what you say about Medicare and Social Security is strictly true, people are drawing out a lot more in benefits than they're contributing, especially for Medicare. That's going to bankrupt the country. Democrat Congressmen don't care, they're just thinking about the next election. Obama on the other hand, I have no idea whether he's stupid or partisan or focused on the short term, but he apparently doesn't give a rat's ass about what happens after he leaves the presidency and future generations are stuck with the bills for his stupidity.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by seedman55

. They are all as worthless as a dog with two assholes....

Now that was funny. Though I bet JD Cornhole would find sheep with two asshole's useful!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

, without either (a) taxing EVERYONE at MUCH higher rates or (b) bankrupting the country, like Greece.

WTF, While what you say about Medicare and Social Security is strictly true, people are drawing out a lot more in benefits than they're contributing, especially for Medicare. That's going to bankrupt the country. Democrat Congressmen don't care, they're just thinking about the next election. Obama on the other hand, I have no idea whether he's stupid or partisan or focused on the short term, but he apparently doesn't give a rat's ass about what happens after he leaves the presidency and future generations are stuck with the bills for his stupidity.

Look, I have said we all need to pay higher taxes and we need to reduce spending.

Reduce spending by two ways, cutting Defense and Cutting Medicare benifits. SS is doing fine but we need to have a conversation in this country to see if we want to continue spending on things we haven't taxed correctly or reduce spending. That means cuts in both Defense and Medicare. There is no other way.

One last thing for all you Tea Nut Greece crying fuckers. We will not in our lifetime wind up like Greece. They can not print their own money and we aren't really even doing that, though a small argument could be made that we sorta are. . I will not go into the reasons why but you show your ignorance by repeating stupid shit politicians are telling you.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...weimar/254715/

How are the United States' historic budget deficits, money-printing and depressed economy any different from the country's that have experienced hyper-inflation? The three-part answer is: (1) we don't have any problems selling our debt; (2) we aren't actually printing money; and (3) the United States is a highly productive economy that is nothing like bombed-out Budapest.

Let me unpack these one by one. Right now getting the markets to buy our debt isn't the problem. Getting enough debt for the markets to buy is the problem. Investors are so crazy to load up on Treasuries that they're actually paying us to borrow, taking inflation into account. But while we're currently getting free money from investors, Hungary circa 1945 was getting no money. It was an investment pariah. If Hungary wanted to rebuild its economy, its only recourse was the printing press.

Second, the United States isn't really printing money. At least not like post-war Hungary. Quantitative easing is usually described as "money-printing" but it's not really. QE involves the Fed buying longer-term bonds from banks. It simply swaps one asset for another -- in this case, cash for longer-term bonds. Unlike Hungary, the Fed isn't directly paying the Treasury's bills. This is a hugely important distinction.

Whatever money the Fed "prints" is stuck in the banks. That money isn't inflationary as long as the banks don't lend it out. What if the banks do start lending at a faster clip? The Fed can still effectively pay the banks not lend by, for example, raising the interest on excess reserves or require the banks to set aside more money. It would be shocking for the Fed not to pursue one of these options.

Third, the most important difference between us and post-war Hungary or Weimar is that our roads haven't been razed to the ground and half the country isn't striking. It's very difficult to have hyperinflation when you still have a functioning economy. Almost all examples of hyperinflation result from huge economic shocks that devastate an economy so much that leaders think printing money is the only solution to growth. As bad as the Great Recession has been, our GDP is already back to and above its all-time pre-recession high. As bad as unemployment is, more than 80 percent of the labor force is working. In Zimbabwe, 80 percent of the population was unemployed.

Let's conclude with a modest proposal for an economic corollary to Godwin's Law. The first person to reference Weimar's hyperinflation in an economic debate automatically loses.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Yes we should spend less on defense. Otherwise your posts are completely screwed. You think by taxing 2% of the population at high rates as proposed by Obama (income >$200,000/year) or 0.12% of the population as proposed by Schumer and Pelosi (income > $1,000,000/year) you're going to close a $1 trillion deficit and pay for the retirement and medical care of Americans? It's not going to happen. The wealthy don't have enough money. Democrats are cynically pursuing a tax increase on the wealthy for political purposes. There's no way they can continue with big government, currently running over 40% of GDP if you include localities and states, without either (a) taxing EVERYONE at MUCH higher rates or (b) bankrupting the country, like Greece.

WTF, While what you say about Medicare and Social Security is strictly true, people are drawing out a lot more in benefits than they're contributing, especially for Medicare. That's going to bankrupt the country. Democrat Congressmen don't care, they're just thinking about the next election. Obama on the other hand, I have no idea whether he's stupid or partisan or focused on the short term, but he apparently doesn't give a rat's ass about what happens after he leaves the presidency and future generations are stuck with the bills for his stupidity.

Obama is clearly not stupid, at least not so stupid that he thinks we can go on running trillion dollar deficits without a catastrophic result. So that leaves us with partisanship as an explanation for his behavior. I'd say that's essentially accurate. But it's more than that.

I believe Obama is deliberately trying to crash the system so that he can replace the existing capitalist system with a government centered socialist/Marxist system. No other explanation makes sense. The path we are on is obviously not sustainable for much longer and Obama will not allow any meaningful cuts in spending, which is the only way we can avert an economic collapse.

I believe Obama is implementing a version of the Cloward-Piven strategy of using an economic collapse as a devise to transition into a socialist/Marxist system, Obama's "fundamental transformation."


From American Thinker.com:

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.


Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:

"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/..._strategy.html

[Yssup Rider]

GODDAMN are you deluded.

Deliberatelyntrying the crash the economy.

I hope you're willing to leave for another month...

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

GODDAMN are you deluded.

Deliberatelyntrying the crash the economy.

I hope you're willing to leave for another month...

One of us is completely out of their mind; it isn't me.

You clearly should have stopped the glue sniffing years ago. Now it's too late.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

I believe Obama is implementing a version of the Cloward-Piven strategy of using an economic collapse as a devise to transition into a socialist/Marxist system, Obama's "fundamental transformation."

l

You also believe in God...some superman floating around in the sky that knows all.

How could your God let something like what you believe Obama wants to do....happen?

If you coulld transform yourself back into 1936 Germany and you knew then wtf you know now, would you try and kill Hitler? If so, do you think Obama is another Hitler? Stalin?

Those questions are for any of you Tea Party folks that believe like joe.

Ya'll have a Merry Christmas ...and try not to overthrow the government until after the New Year.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

One of us is completely out of their mind; it isn't me.

You clearly should have stopped the glue sniffing years ago. Now it's too late.

Nicely put. explain, please, how you arrive at your ridiculous conclusions, and why you think,anybody should believe them?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by WTF

Look, I have said we all need to pay higher taxes and we need to reduce spending.

Reduce spending by two ways, cutting Defense and Cutting Medicare benifits. SS is doing fine but we need to have a conversation in this country to see if we want to continue spending on things we haven't taxed correctly or reduce spending. That means cuts in both Defense and Medicare. There is no other way.

One last thing for all you Tea Nut Greece crying fuckers. We will not in our lifetime wind up like Greece. They can not print their own money and we aren't really even doing that, though a small argument could be made that we sorta are. . I will not go into the reasons why but you show your ignorance by repeating stupid shit politicians are telling you.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...weimar/254715/

How are the United States' historic budget deficits, money-printing and depressed economy any different from the country's that have experienced hyper-inflation? The three-part answer is: (1) we don't have any problems selling our debt; (2) we aren't actually printing money; and (3) the United States is a highly productive economy that is nothing like bombed-out Budapest.

Let me unpack these one by one. Right now getting the markets to buy our debt isn't the problem. Getting enough debt for the markets to buy is the problem. Investors are so crazy to load up on Treasuries that they're actually paying us to borrow, taking inflation into account. But while we're currently getting free money from investors, Hungary circa 1945 was getting no money. It was an investment pariah. If Hungary wanted to rebuild its economy, its only recourse was the printing press.

OK, There's wisdom in some of what you say, and you, unlike many Democrat politicians, do recognize there's a problem. The problem is that if federal government expenditures are perpetually 22% of GDP and revenues are 16% of GDP, the federal government will go bankrupt. If medical costs continue at 17% of GDP, if the population continues to age, and if people continue taking 2X as much out of Medicare as they put in, the federal government will go bankrupt. We will end up like Greece, even though right now we do have the world's reserve currency. There are some Republican politicans that are concerned and trying to do something about this. Unfortunately, Democrats don't seem to care (whatever happened to people in your party like Robert Rubin?), and unfortunately Democrats are likely to dominate the federal government for the next few decades.

I never said anything about inflation and don't understand why you went off on that tangent.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Obama is clearly not stupid, at least not so stupid that he thinks we can go on running trillion dollar deficits without a catastrophic result. So that leaves us with partisanship as an explanation for his behavior. I'd say that's essentially accurate. But it's more than that.

I believe Obama is deliberately trying to crash the system so that he can replace the existing capitalist system with a government centered socialist/Marxist system. No other explanation makes sense. The path we are on is obviously not sustainable for much longer and Obama will not allow any meaningful cuts in spending, which is the only way we can avert an economic collapse.

I believe Obama is implementing a version of the Cloward-Piven strategy of using an economic collapse as a devise to transition into a socialist/Marxist system, Obama's "fundamental transformation."

Damn, Joe the Bloehard is transitioning into a verifiable looney tunes character right in front of our very eyes. Jerry Fletcher ain't got nothing on ol' Joe!

[Yssup Rider]

don't expect him to know who that is, BT.

[Fast Gunn]

No One In Control.

. . . That pretty much sums up the Republican party these days!

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

don't expect him to know who that is, BT.

Hint to Joe the Bloehard, Google is your friend!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

OK, There's wisdom in some of what you say, and you, unlike many Democrat politicians, do recognize there's a problem. The problem is that if federal government expenditures are perpetually 22% of GDP and revenues are 16% of GDP, the federal government will go bankrupt. If medical costs continue at 17% of GDP, if the population continues to age, and if people continue taking 2X as much out of Medicare as they put in, the federal government will go bankrupt. We will end up like Greece, even though right now we do have the world's reserve currency. There are some Republican politicans that are concerned and trying to do something about this. Unfortunately, Democrats don't seem to care (whatever happened to people in your party like Robert Rubin?), and unfortunately Democrats are likely to dominate the federal government for the next few decades.

I never said anything about inflation and don't understand why you went off on that tangent.

You said nothing about Defense.

Medicare could be fixed...though I do not think the old fuckers will like it. But folks like you never seem to mention this huge expense called Defense. When SS and Medicare ran this huge surplus, Defense just left IOU's in their account. What does that mean you might ask? It means that DEFENSE has been the huge expense that we have not taxed properly for.

We can tweek the other two but Defense....we need to raise taxes on all to pay for it. Now they can do like they did in 1986 and just raise more revenue from working folks and cut benifits to retired or soon to be retired folks and divert that savings toward Defense spending but I think folks on the left are starting to catch on to that Peter robbing Paul BS.

[Chica Chaser]

WTF Godwin'ed a thread? (kinda)
I didn't think anyone here knew about Godwins Law.