I just saw a guy living in his car, never before in my hood
- Thread starter C- kid
- Start date
Where in Texas? I heard Austin was a happening place with good venues and cheap living.
And the best college ass in the world!
And the best college ass in the world!
The Democrats are for tax and spend.
The Republicans are for tax your kids (deficit spend) and spend.
Both are for the inflation-eats-away-your-buying-power tax.
Democrats are for BJ's in the Oval Office.
Republicans are for family values. That's why that Republican Congressman from Staten Island NY had a 2nd secret family. 2 families, twice as many values!
Generally there are two camps:
Some don't believe life starts at conception, so you can kill the fetus. After birth, they do not believe in the death penalty as punishment.
Others believe life starts at conception so abortion is murder. If found guilty after birth of a serious enough crime , they believe you should be put to death.
For specifics, mix and match...
Ever consider looking up some facts?
Bush took office in 2001 not 2000.
Clinton had a budget surplus in fiscal years 1998 to 2001 ( due to the internet bubble), but the national debt still went up each year.
When Clinton came into office in fiscal 1993 the National debt was $4.4 trillion and when he left in fiscal 2001 it was $5.8 trillion.
The lack of balanced budgets (let alone surpluses) and the continually growing national debt is the due to both Democrats and Republicans in Congress showing no real interest in fiscal responsibility other than for political posturing. The current farm bill with its overwhelming bipartisan veto-proof support is a perfect example of the continual fiscal irresponsibility of both parties in Congress.
The fiscal situation will never change for the better until the taxpayer is put first and not the receivers of government largess. This is not going to happen any time in the near future.
Thanks for your insightful comment Mad Alfred. I actually think the entire neo-conservative driven War on Terror has been a disaster, has made the world a more dangerous place now than before 9/11, and surely has great economic reprecussions for the United States. I also agree with you that high commodity prices, particurarly oil, has been the result of the falling dollar. I would also add that speculation similar to that of the dot.com bubble is an equally significant factor.
I understand that your arguement is mostly derived from the fact that the dollar has been falling in value. While I also believe that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have contributed to the rise of our national debt and thereby a declining dollar, I think there is one factor that you have left out in your analysis. The actions of the FED!
IMO the dollar would not have declined against other world currencies so dramatically if the FED did not constantly lower interest rates. Obviously when the FED does so, the dollar goes down in value the vast majority of the time. That being said, we must ask why the FED has continously done this. While the War on Terror may be one cause, the overwhelming reason responsible for this action has been the subprime mortgage issue. The Financial Sector has been hit as a consequence of making risky and overtly aggresive decisions/investments. Bear Stearns for example has always had a reputation for being exceptionally aggressive and now they just recently paid for it. The Financial Sector unfortunately has also driven down other sectors. Attempting to stop this decline, the FED has cut interest rates to revitalize the economy and boost confidence in the markets. This strategy relates to the Keynsian theories of government spending and regulation in the economy. It is failing miserably, however. Every time the FED cuts interests rates, the dollar falls. The Iraq War is not the reason why the Fed does this, but rather the subprime mortgage issues. That is the reason why I am an advocate of Austrian School of Economics: no government intervention in the markets. Furthermore, I have been traditionally Republican because individuals like Reagan endorsed this principle. I am a fiscal conservative, but could care less about social issues like gay marriage and so forth. Bush IMO adheres to a new, and unproductive, breed of conservatism. As much as I hate the position religion takes in politics, Bush's bigger faults are the wars in the Middle East and spending like crazy.
In sum, the declining dollar has certainly contributed to the gap between the rich and poor and to the reduction of the middle class. That being said, the FED has cut rates not because of the War on Terror, but rather because of the subprime mortgage issues. Therefore, the blame should go to actions of the FED. Their policies have incredibly short term affects in the market.
Also, it is incredibly hot today in Long Island thereby making up for the light rain we had earlier this week. Ironically, I also planned to have a bbq tonight.
jeb9999 said ""The fiscal situation will never change for the better until the taxpayer is put first and not the receivers of government largess. This is not going to happen any time in the near future.""
I fear our "leaders" won't do anything until the Gubmint can't meet it's payroll.
And even then, Congress will just pass a tax bill that confiscates everything. I mean literally everything.
As long as Joe SixPack has his beer, 5000 channels, and a chair, he won't even notice.
I fear our "leaders" won't do anything until the Gubmint can't meet it's payroll.
And even then, Congress will just pass a tax bill that confiscates everything. I mean literally everything.
As long as Joe SixPack has his beer, 5000 channels, and a chair, he won't even notice.
The majority of leaders do what is best for them. This is just part of human nature. Politicians for example do as much as possible just to ensure that they keep their post, while also serving personal interests. The majority pursue wealth, however. I also totally agree with your ordinary Joe comment. The vast majority of the low and even middle class populations are uneducated in economics and don't know what reality is. They get their news from completely bias sources like FOX and are manipulated. I would claim that most don't even watch the news. Look at how few of Americans read the newspaper daily.
The way the economy is today, it's every man for himself. If your stuck in a bad position, such as living in a car, you can't expect government handouts. You should do whatever it takes to get back on your feet. It will obviously be a difficult struggle but it is better than waiting for the gov't to do something, considering the current economy, the national debt and an endless list of other factors.
My realist beliefs may seem extreme, but that is how the world operates. The rich will continue to get richer, and will attempt to satisfy the poor just so they do not revolt. This is the history of most civilizations. More recently, it is also true of most European countries (French Revolution). Today, the average Joe is still content. Although average Joes outnumber the elites, they are unaware of what is happening to them and fail to take any action. Nothing will happen until the average Joe will realize the difference between his life and that of an elite. In other words, life is still good enough for the majority of average Joes in the United States, thereby preventing them from revolting. The concept of an all out "revolution" of the system is surely premature in the US. What I mean by revolt is that ordinary citizens take more active steps in civic duties and educate themselves about the world and their own country. Hold "leaders" accountable. Sadly, they are content with their pickup trucks, McDonalds, and 5000 DishTV Channels and fail to make any progress on a mass scale.
You blame them for losing their jobs? Having no way to get to their jobs (commuting) because gas prices are taking a large chunk of their income? As far as I am aware, these are related instances and situations many people are mired in at the moment, with more to soon enter such reality.
That's kind of irrelevant. You see, not all people can just move to a new state to begin with, and what's the probability that they will be able to replace their current jobs in their current state, for a job in Texas that offers similar value and a similar salary? Equal quality? Then again, a lot of factors depend on whether you think Wal-Mart is a decent, quality job offer. Our government seems to think Wal-Mart is doing us good by supplying us a million, shitty jobs.
Think outside the box, sometimes. Unless they're working for Wal-Mart or Petsmart, it's not easy to just transfer to a completely new location, while hoping to get reinstated.
How is that irrational thinking? The cats accompany her, maybe she feels less lonely in the process.
