Everything Should Be Cut In Economic Crisis

Ok I'll play that game. Before we even get anywhere... what "economic blackhole" are you talking about?

 

Even with military spending included, no one has been able to convince me that we are spending too much. And I'm not a hard guy, but the conservatives won't even attemp to explain how we're spending too much. The best I get is "all spending is too much" or "we have a huge deficit so it HAS to be too much spending." Bunk.

The crisis is 100% revenue shortfall and Bush's tax breaks for votes scheme. It's impossible to believe that just 12 years ago the deficit was $0.

 

Theoretically maybe, but they are only going to cost more jobs, less tax revenue from those jobs, and an even higher demand for social services in this economy. For the long term.

 

OK, you are so uninformed it's scary, so I'm going to go slow for you.
De-regulating the banking industy is what ALLOWED the 'bundling' of bad paper with good, it took away the incentive for banks to vet customers appling for loans, they had no reason to to any long as they were not going to hold on to the paper.
Understand?
Fanny and freddy were mandated by bush the failure to buy these bad bundles in a failed effort to help the banks when they started to go under.
Got it?
The CRA had NOTHING to do with it, it's a GOP lie to fool idiots and morons.
Is that you?
panic investing??
Wow.

You mean like all the growth Glass-Steagal inhibited?
See where I'm going????

Do you?

They more than likely have your mortgage, what are you going to then?

 

Impending fiscal cliff (before you start, see my "Fiscal Cliff: So What?" thread), ridiculous deficit, overspending, etc.

It's not anywhere near the worst we've ever been in and will be pretty much a non-issue around 2015-2016, but for now it is an issue.

 

As far as I'm concerned, "too much spending" is $1 trillion+ on any one budget item. Most of our overspending, such as with our military, is 100% waste that doesn't need to be there.

 

Its more like the 16 trillion in debt we owe to someone who also has our jobs that is bothersome.

 

Not to mention that when the military was told they had to reign in the budget, they did and found that they needed even less once they rethought everything.

 

So you figure adding millions more to the unemployment rolls is just the ticket eh?

So how do you figure that going to help the economy?

 

Oh, but we have to keep blowing up brown kids and throwing money at defense contractors while telling our returning soldiers "(*)(*)(*)(*) off," so we'll keep spending.

 

How do you figure cutting waste from our budgets will add millions to the unemployment rolls?

 

... I agree with you... wait, something's wrong. I must find some angle upon which to disagree.

 

Well, I figured you were talking about fairly substantial cuts, or you wouldn't have started a thread on it.

What do you think happens when you cut funding for the Govt? People lose their jobs.

In fact, it's been about 1/2 million over the past couple years, which is one reason the unemployment rate is still close to 8%.

 

Any amount cut from government spending is an amount (plus interest) kept by the private sector.

 

No it isn't. You pay the same amount of taxes regardless of how much the Govt spends.

 

How do you figure when the govt if financing the spending with debt?

But let's assume that is true. So no you have a couple million more people on the unemployment rolls, and the richest and business have another trillion they stick in their offshore accounts.

How does that help the economy?

 

And how do you think government pays off debt?

It's true because any government spending has to be paid for eventually. The rest, sorry, is just hyper-partisan rhetoric. Money that isn't taxed will usually be spent relatively soon, but even that which isn't spent in the short-term are most likely to be used to invest. In companies. Which usually hire people.

 

With debt

 

That has no effect on the economy now.

Trillions of dollars sitting doing nothing in corporate accounts and the offshore accounts of the uber rich says otherwise.

They don't hire if folks are spending.

And when you've cut a million or so more jobs, what do you think is going to happen to spending?

 

We could chop fat cat oil welfare subsidies. They obviously don't need them. We could discontinue pay and benefits to the dems and cons until the dems and cons do their friggin' jobs and resolve the issues. We could do a lot of things that fat cat interests wouldn't like and then we might actually resolve something....but then fat cats control everything so, I doubt anything but hot air and rhetoric will ever result.

 

Lol. I didn't think we disagreed THAT much

 

Explain.

 

So we should have needless government agencies so that people can have jobs, not because we actually need those agencies? We should have troops all over the world and bases in Guam and Germany so that we can prevent unemployment?

How about cutting spending and taxes, too, so people have money to create private industry jobs?

 

Hyper-partisan bs again. Really. You ought to give it a break.

1. It does have an effect on the economy now. It lowers confidence, which decreases spending.
2. There's interest on that debt, and the effect it has on the economy in the future is compounded. Like Einstein said, nothing is more powerful than compound interest, and you would have it work against us.
3. Really? Trillions of dollars? The income tax raises about 1.1trillion dollars, and you think that if we reduced spending we'd have trillions more dollars each year just sitting in 'fat cat' accounts? Are you on the Obama campaign email list?

Phew. We disagree again. All is well.

 

The country is too large for central planning, actually. A small country like Lichtenstein can have central planning. A country as large as ours will flail about and accomplish half-assed work with lagging results, I offer up the War on Poverty and the Drug War. Trillions pumped into these programs to a) get people up and working and b) stop the use of illicit substances. People stay on welfare until cut off and everyone still does drugs.

Even aside from all that, Central Planning is immoral because it uses force, not voluntary cooperation. Look at you, you'll force me to contribute to programs like the DEA and TSA despite my moral objections or put me in jail because you feel that I should want to do this. That's immoral.