Why the USA is where it is today economically.

  • jc_online

    Posts: 487

    Jun 17, 2011 1:47 PM GMT
    [url]http://front.moveon.org/scribbling-sharpie-illustrates-the-truth-about-our-economy/#.TfpiyvbUXNp;facebook[/url]

    Discuss
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 7:45 PM GMT
    jc_online said[url]http://front.moveon.org/scribbling-sharpie-illustrates-the-truth-about-our-economy/#.TfpiyvbUXNp;facebook[/url]

    Discuss


    "One cannot avoid choosing between the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address and that of the Communist Manifesto." Ludwig von Mises Human Action

    When the United States was based on limited, Constitutional government, it was the greatest, most prosperous, and free nation on earth.

    Then the American people bought into Statism, e.g., the notion that government could spend, borrow, regulate, and print us into Utopia. Robert B. Reich has advocated Statism his whole life.

    Now the federal government's spending, borrowing, regulating, and phony-money making are out of control. Why in the hell should Bernanke have the power to create trillions of dollars out of nothing, give that money to his banking buddies, including some overseas, and debase the dollars Americans have in our savings and retirement accounts, while driving up the price of everything. It's voodoo.

    Each household in America is now on the hook for over $530,000 to cover the $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities of the federal government.

    Instead of the federal government spending, borrowing, regulating, and printing us into prosperity, we are on the verge of an economic crisis and collapse. Higher unemployment, hyperinflation, a stock market crash, and civil disobedience are predicted.

    Whenever a Fraud like Obama or a schemer like Reich starts talking class warfare, as Reich does in this video, its Statist snake oil time.

    We need a civil society based on limited government and free markets, not more of the Statist snake oil which got us here.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 7:55 PM GMT
    Pssst... I heard jock fever has a swastika tattooed on his butt.

    Just saying.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 8:00 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidPssst... I heard jock fever has a swastika tattooed on his butt.

    Just saying.


    That's more likely on your butt than someone who truly believes in free markets.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 9:15 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidPssst... I heard jock fever has a swastika tattooed on his butt.

    Just saying.


    Tiny Tim you being into the thuggery that you are. One can just see you being one of those homosexual brown Shirts who helped put Mr Hitler into power, with the false promise of advancement; many of them academic liberals to; who thought they were so smart and clever; until it was all to comer and bite them back on the arse. You were just born in the wrong time and place; like a few others here.

    Just saying......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 10:46 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    TigerTim saidPssst... I heard jock fever has a swastika tattooed on his butt.

    Just saying.


    That's more likely on your butt than someone who truly believes in free markets.


    There is no such thing as a "free market". Never has been.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 10:57 PM GMT
    We are where we are because we are short-term minded, get-the-most-for-less-or-nothing, bottom-line-focused money grubbers. icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 11:26 PM GMT
    TerraFirma saidWe are where we are because we are short-term minded, get-the-most-for-less-or-nothing, bottom-line-focused money grubbers. icon_mad.gif


    Which sounds nice until you actually look at how policies also made a substantial difference. How's that for stimulus that benefited megacorporations like GE and traditional supporters of the Democrats like public unions the most?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 11:31 PM GMT
    I don't stress out too much about the state of the American economy, because I do the best I can to address my own personal economy. My income would not be considered fantastic, but I live on a budget, pay my bills on time, and try to save a little. Also, I try to help with some charitable causes as well as helping family and friends if they need it -- all based on what I can afford. It works pretty well for me and I am very happy, because I know that pretending to be wealthy when I'm not, is not the right way to go.

    With that being said, I would like to say that the Washington politicians know what has to be done to make America solvent, and powerful again. It's not a matter of liberal vs. conservative; it's a matter of doing the right thing. It's all about ethics and sadly to say, I think we could all use an ethics reality check. Maybe Washington needs to realize that genius is making the complex simple. I commend those who have the guts to try to do something.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 11:32 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidPssst... I heard jock fever has a swastika tattooed on his butt.

    Just saying.



    HAHAHA, you made me laugh....I wanna marry you now.
  • Jonny21

    Posts: 199

    Jun 17, 2011 11:36 PM GMT
    To be honesty, although many of our financial problems ARE due to financial imprudence, lack of vision, and bad policy decisions (from both parties), I think the two biggest things that are taking jobs away, stagnating real wages, and cutting into our financial prosperity are GLOBALIZATION and TECHNOLOGY.

    The scary part of the whole situation is not that these two are unstoppable (which no body is stopping) is that we are doing very little to adjust to the situation.

    The world has continued to become a smaller more even place in the past three or four decades, and although many of the western, developed countries still have a lot of clout in terms of financial, political, and military matters; there are many emerging countries like China, Brazil and India that are starting to compete with these western "powerhouses".

    In my opinion, the first to solve the energy challenge will be the country (or coalition of countries) that will dominate for the next century or so (I don't really like the word dominate, but I am too lazy to find another word). Now, I know there are some that think the term "energy challenge" automatically equates to global warming, but I think the energy challenge goes beyond global warming. To me the energy challenge speaks to global warning, national security, economics and pure sustainability (just think in the next fifty years when Brazil, India, China's standard of living begins to rise, presumably millions upon millions more will want to own a car and utilize more electricity. Meanwhile, fossil fuels will continue to become more depleted. A simply lesson in supply and demand shows why this will be bad for everyone.)

    Speaking as an American, I believe there are five things we need to do
    1. First, and foremost get out of this recession, I mean "recovery"
    2. Fix healthcare, I give the recent healthcare bill a "C" for effort, but it never did much to solve the cost issue in healthcare. I think a single-payer system is the only way healthcare cost will ever go down significantly (unfortunately, there is not enough political will for it). I know this may offend some conservative RJ's but when it come to dealing with healthcare I don't trust the conservative perspective for the fact that they had nearly 15 years (starting in 1994) to deal with the problem and they did not do much.
    3. Truly invest in education, the next phrase in the evolution of our economy will be more technological-driven than before so we need more smart people. Plus, we have too many uneducated people running anyway.
    4. Solve the energy challenge that I spoke of before, kind of like the space-race (but, with an actual purpose this time around).
    5. Stop being so partisan and start becoming more pragmatic, we already have sheepish leadership (Presidents, Congresspeople and other leaders) that are only concern about polls and public opinion. I feel that we help feed into this problem sometimes. We spend too time arguing about the "Weiners" and "Tea-baggers" or whether Obama is a Muslim or whether Bush "likes black people" instead of focusing on more relevant issues.

    P.S I was really bored, this is why wrote so much!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2011 11:41 PM GMT
    Christian73: There is no such thing as a "free market". Never has been.

    jockfever: Here we have a choice between a Lib assertion and a definition by economist Murray Rothbard.

    What Is the Free Market? by Murray N. Rothbard

    The Free market is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is undertaken as a voluntary agreement between two people or between groups of people represented by agents. These two individuals (or agents) exchange two economic goods, either tangible commodities or nontangible services.

    Thus, when I buy a newspaper from a news dealer for fifty cents, the news dealer and I exchange two commodities: I give up fifty cents, and the news dealer gives up the newspaper.

    Or if I work for a corporation, I exchange my labor services, in a mutually agreed way, for a monetary salary; here the corporation is represented by a manager (an agent) with the authority to hire.

    Both parties undertake the exchange because each expects to gain from it. Also, each will repeat the exchange next time (or refuse to) because his expectation has proved correct (or incorrect) in the recent past. Trade, or exchange, is engaged in precisely because both parties benefit; if they did not expect to gain, they would not agree to the exchange.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:02 AM GMT
    I know fuck-all about economics, but it seems the US needs a little bit of wealth, or shuold I say, tax distribution (oooo dirty word) or else it ll turn into Venezuela..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:02 AM GMT
    Greenhopper saidI know fuck-all about economics, but it seems the US needs a little bit of wealth, or shuold I say, tax distribution (oooo dirty word) or else it ll turn into Venezuela..


    Because redistribution and Hugo Chavez has worked out so well for Venezuela?! icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:04 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Greenhopper saidI know fuck-all about economics, but it seems the US needs a little bit of wealth, or shuold I say, tax distribution (oooo dirty word) or else it ll turn into Venezuela..


    Because redistribution and Hugo Chavez has worked out so well for Venezuela?! icon_eek.gif


    Ehm, did I equate the two? no, think again!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:05 AM GMT
    meh, never mind thinking again, waste of your time, lemme put it another way:

    Either someone in the government distributes the taxes more effectively... OR a bunch of pissed, hungry, angry, dirt-poor underprivileged mobs will take over and put someone incompetent in charge who will fuck things up for real

    iow: keep the masses fed, or face consequences
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:07 AM GMT
    Sorry, was i harsh? i can put it gently if I offended anyone
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:09 AM GMT
    Greenhopper saidmeh, never mind thinking again, waste of your time, lemme put it another way:

    Either someone in the government distributes the taxes more effectively... OR a bunch of pissed, hungry, angry, dirt-poor underprivileged mobs will take over and put someone incompetent in charge who will fuck things up for real

    iow: keep the masses fed, or face consequences


    Nah - that's not how economics works nor should redistribution be a goal of governments. Governments should be about helping the poor move up economically and not tearing others down. The difference is also how corrupt Venezuela has been and how equality of opportunity has really not existed for the Indians - and hence the real discontent.

    I would agree with you however if I believed the only reason that the wealthy were getting wealthier was because they were taking from the poor - but the reality is, they're not. Further, I note that stimulus was one direct example of an attempt to redistribute.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:12 AM GMT
    riddler78 said< Governments should be about helping the poor move up economically and not tearing others down.


    Same difference to me... I say the same thing you do
  • BIG_N_TALL

    Posts: 2190

    Jun 18, 2011 12:18 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    There is no such thing as a "free market". Never has been.


    +1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:34 AM GMT
    What we REALLY need to do is completely do away with our debt-based economic model. We need a resource-based economy, one that thrives on innovation, invention, and people working for the betterment of everyone. The advent of technology makes this 100% possible. We have to change our way of thinking, and I think we will, and I think it's already happening.

    Jonny21 saidTo be honesty, although many of our financial problems ARE due to financial imprudence, lack of vision, and bad policy decisions (from both parties), I think the two biggest things that are taking jobs away, stagnating real wages, and cutting into our financial prosperity are GLOBALIZATION and TECHNOLOGY.

    The scary part of the whole situation is not that these two are unstoppable (which no body is stopping) is that we are doing very little to adjust to the situation.

    The world has continued to become a smaller more even place in the past three or four decades, and although many of the western, developed countries still have a lot of clout in terms of financial, political, and military matters; there are many emerging countries like China, Brazil and India that are starting to compete with these western "powerhouses".

    In my opinion, the first to solve the energy challenge will be the country (or coalition of countries) that will dominate for the next century or so (I don't really like the word dominate, but I am too lazy to find another word). Now, I know there are some that think the term "energy challenge" automatically equates to global warming, but I think the energy challenge goes beyond global warming. To me the energy challenge speaks to global warning, national security, economics and pure sustainability (just think in the next fifty years when Brazil, India, China's standard of living begins to rise, presumably millions upon millions more will want to own a car and utilize more electricity. Meanwhile, fossil fuels will continue to become more depleted. A simply lesson in supply and demand shows why this will be bad for everyone.)

    Speaking as an American, I believe there are five things we need to do
    1. First, and foremost get out of this recession, I mean "recovery"
    2. Fix healthcare, I give the recent healthcare bill a "C" for effort, but it never did much to solve the cost issue in healthcare. I think a single-payer system is the only way healthcare cost will ever go down significantly (unfortunately, there is not enough political will for it). I know this may offend some conservative RJ's but when it come to dealing with healthcare I don't trust the conservative perspective for the fact that they had nearly 15 years (starting in 1994) to deal with the problem and they did not do much.
    3. Truly invest in education, the next phrase in the evolution of our economy will be more technological-driven than before so we need more smart people. Plus, we have too many uneducated people running anyway.
    4. Solve the energy challenge that I spoke of before, kind of like the space-race (but, with an actual purpose this time around).
    5. Stop being so partisan and start becoming more pragmatic, we already have sheepish leadership (Presidents, Congresspeople and other leaders) that are only concern about polls and public opinion. I feel that we help feed into this problem sometimes. We spend too time arguing about the "Wieners" and "Tea-baggers" or whether Obama is a Muslim or whether Bush "like black people" instead of focusing on more relevant issues.

    P.S I was really bored, this is why wrote so much!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:35 AM GMT
    Alpha1 said
    Christian73 said
    There is no such thing as a "free market". Never has been.


    +1


    True that, its pretty much an illusion, eh?

    The market creates the demand....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:37 AM GMT
    Brandon112586 saidWhat we REALLY need to do is completely do away with our debt-based economic model. >


    Thats a good point, Ive always wondered whether debt, rather than surplus, is really a sustainable base for an economy,good question
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:46 AM GMT
    jockfever saidChristian73: There is no such thing as a "free market". Never has been.

    jockfever: Here we have a choice between a Lib assertion and a definition by economist Murray Rothbard.

    What Is the Free Market? by Murray N. Rothbard

    The Free market is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is undertaken as a voluntary agreement between two people or between groups of people represented by agents. These two individuals (or agents) exchange two economic goods, either tangible commodities or nontangible services.

    Thus, when I buy a newspaper from a news dealer for fifty cents, the news dealer and I exchange two commodities: I give up fifty cents, and the news dealer gives up the newspaper.

    Or if I work for a corporation, I exchange my labor services, in a mutually agreed way, for a monetary salary; here the corporation is represented by a manager (an agent) with the authority to hire.

    Both parties undertake the exchange because each expects to gain from it. Also, each will repeat the exchange next time (or refuse to) because his expectation has proved correct (or incorrect) in the recent past. Trade, or exchange, is engaged in precisely because both parties benefit; if they did not expect to gain, they would not agree to the exchange.


    I could also provide the definition of a unicorn, but that doesn't mean they're real. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 18, 2011 12:52 AM GMT
    Greenhopper said
    Brandon112586 saidWhat we REALLY need to do is completely do away with our debt-based economic model. >


    Thats a good point, Ive always wondered whether debt, rather than surplus, is really a sustainable base for an economy,good question


    It is not sustainable. The reason regulation won't fix anything is because it's too late. It's like installing seatbelts into a car that's already had an accident. The design itself needs to be changed. I'm not suggesting we all go back to being farmers, but what we need to do is the following:

    1) Reform our education system into one that teaches applicable skills not only for personal survival and prosperity, but also for societal benefit (such as what Finland does... our test-based rote system is incredibly stupid).
    2) We need an economic model that is not based on making obscene profits, or gambling on budled mortgages, but rather on what people can contribute to society. This means innovation, invention and technological development.
    3) We need a health care system whose sole purpose is to cure disease. Treatments hinder research for cures, because treatments are what drives profits. Cures are bad business. We need a health care system that focuses on preventative medicine. This goes back to education, which should also include how to live a healthy, sustainable life.
    4) We need to do away with agri-biz. Local food production, I believe, is what will sustain us after the collapse of Capitalism (mainly caused by what we've done to Capitalism), which, to all of you deniers, IS going to happen. Please reference how Cuba thrived after the fall of the USSR. It's fascinating.
    5) This is absolutely critical. We have to find a source of energy that is not a fossil fuel. This means natural, clean, sustainable energy, be it from the Sun, wind, ocean or geothermal sources.
    6) We need to reinvest in infrastructure. We need high speed electric rail connecting our cities.

    This is just a thought.