Happy Independence Day
Sun, 07/04/2010 - 1:07am
 |
   15 years
|
Wishing all our southern neighbors a very happy and safe holiday.
|
15 years
|
Wishing all our southern neighbors a very happy and safe holiday.
What is with you?
Well, it’s one thing to say, “Support the troops” and it’s another to say, “Let’s keep sending our men and women around the world to act as the policeman of the world”. The difference is keeping our leaders accountable.
Really? Now your injecting another 'issue'.
Tell ya what..why dont you try keeping hussain accountable. Afterall, he's 'chief' now...
Or is that too much?
What I was getting at is the question: At what moment in time did we surpass the point where we as a country believed there were no limits? How many bases and troops do we have scattered around the world?
No...no you didnt.
You went off on the 3rd ammendment of the bill of rights.
I called you on it..
Now you change up the subject..move the goal posts...etc
(Typical...)
Do you have a PROBLEM SIR?!?!
I believe it’s a disfavor for the general public to hold the use of the military as sacrosanct and beyond reproach.
Really?
I'll address this even tho you have already 'been addressed' and you are now shuck'in and jiving to justify your 'first' unwanted post in a thread that simply allows folks to express their appreciation of July 4th...
Obviously you dont like the military. WE GET IT!
Now then...after the summary retort of your previous babblings you now take the position that 'the military is all god-like'.
Well..nobody has stated that.
Your strawmen are WEAK..and frankly irritating. (an obvious 'tact' of a 'person' such of your persuasion.)
WE know who the military answers to...and the simple expression of our appreciation of said military is NOT grounds for you to waltz up, build a strawman and try to take it down.
GET IT?
(Are you some hippy still living in a 60's haze? Or some punk kid worshiping some america-hating wackjob professor?)
In this budget climate, everything should be put on the table for discussion to be examined under a critical eye. We have to get past the idea that the military is some sacred cow. This idea is why Congress under the powers granted to it by Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution seems to always attach unrelated riders (pork) to the defense spending bills which are virtually guaranteed passage due to the high regard with which military missions are seen. Some of the perpetuation of this mindset is fueled by the revolving door between industry and government which leads to the protection of vested interests. And, it’s certainly not too difficult to see cases of corruption where large amounts of money are involved.
Your point?
Why dont you present some particular 'budget' item and we can go from there.
I bet you have no problem with hussains stimulus that has FAILED.
Plus..I have new for ya 'buddy'...without the military, without the ability to defend this country, YOU WOULDNT HAVE A HOME, SYSTEM, CULTURE TO SPOUT OUT YOUR STRAWMEN.
Get it?
And hence my original post that you simply couldnt STAND to read.(or understand)
There is a sentiment, however, among an increasing number of people who wonder if the price of empire is worth it.
"Empire"? Thats cute.
And thats the dead give away of what 'you are'.
Tell me sparky...define 'empire', and tell me where the US has established 'an empire'.
We'll be waiting.
I'll even be here to tear up an anticipated weak attempt at said definition.
(Best check in with your looney prof before engaging me)
As I understand, we have gone far astray from the original intent of limited government while spending and bloated bureaucracy has multiplied by leaps and bounds. The point is that there are limits if history serves as any example: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article12831.html.
Are you trying to give me a lesson?
Shall we start with the 1920's? Or do you have something else in mind.
Trust me... I'm not impressed.
I certainly don’t see the world as you do and I don’t wish you any harm.
Oh..a pacifist too huh?
I suppose that grants you some 'higher moral ground' while strolling in here to attempt some kind of passive aggressive DUMP on our troops.
What I suspect we have here is a failure to communicate or rather my inability to talk your language. This is intended as no slight to the concepts of duty, honor, and love of country which a frank discussion of what I’ve mentioned really does touch upon.
Get bent hippy.
Yes..there is a failure to communicate.
I made a valid retort..you shifted and are continuing to find some vector to slam our troops.
Its not working now is it sparky?
Finally...If you had any respect for our troops, you would have let everyone in this thread post their thoughts about july 4th.
Nuvi 350 Born Oct 07 - Nuvi 660 Unit #2 (re)Born Sept 08 - Nuvi 360(Gift to 'the chick' yet maintained by myself) Born July 08
.
I don't much care for dood's general aggressive hostility, but this statement is particularly troublesome: "Why dont you present some particular 'budget' item and we can go from there.
I bet you have no problem with hussains stimulus that has FAILED."
1) It is common knowledge that Congress gives the Pentagon programs and money it doesn't want or need. The latest is a fighter, the F35 I think, not wanted by the Pentagon, but passed by Congress. The reason? Congressmen want the jobs in their districts created by the contractors and sub-contractors. Industry purposely spreads production over as many districts as possible to gain Congressional allies. In effect, it is a stimulus program.
2) We all know what you are getting at with the "hussain" thing. Grow up. If you have a good enough argument, you don't need to use immature tactics. And, if you are such a loyal patriot as you are trying to appear, you would treat the highest elected U.S. official with appropriate respect, at least in addressing him properly.
3) Only those who are content to stay ignorant of the facts say that the Economic Recovery Act (aka stimulus) has failed. Here are the facts from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO): http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967
The problem now is that the stimulus was not large enough. At the time it was passed, the president and the congressional Democrats wanted a bigger stimulus, but the Republicans, as usual, were in their "no" mode. We need more stimulus now, as the president and Democrats have been saying, but the Republicans are, as usual, in their "no" mode. Everyone with a PhD in economics will tell you that the only way to goose the economy when consumers and businesses are not spending is with government spending. And, in the long run, that will decrease deficits because of increased tax revenues.
nuvi 200 | lifetime maps
When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Get bent hippy.
Oh yeah, you got me pegged there, chief.
Higher level thinking isn’t your forte, is it? If you weren’t lacking in the reading comprehension department you’d see that there is cohesive link between the ideas here but you seem stuck on latching onto something that isn’t there, like some loony talk about hostility towards the military. Perhaps you’re showing signs of paranoia or some other mental disorder, huh?
The lifeblood of the world economy is oil. Barrels of oil are denominated, bought and sold in US dollars. The value of the dollar can influence or control the price of oil. There’s a linkage so that if the dollar goes down in value then the price of a barrel of oil rises inversely.
This hegemony of the dollar is roughly synonymous with ‘empire’. The ‘empire’ is built on the status of the US dollar (or the Federal Reserve Note) as the reserve currency of the world, a status which actually began with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system. [There are other factors that reinforce the US dollar as a reserve currency but it increasing appears the world situation is changing to one where another currency or ‘basket’ of currencies will fulfill this role, perhaps around 2018.]
But let’s look at the situation now. We underwrite the security of the key Gulf States, mainly OPEC countries. What about Iraq? Was it actually a threat to the US? Or, was it more a threat to Saudi Arabia? BTW, did you know that one of the highest consumers of oil is the US military and that BP is a major supplier? Anyway, the regimes who benefit from the Middle East security arrangement allow the denomination of petroleum in US dollars.
Look around, we also provide more than one security umbrella. Another is the Far East protecting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Think high tech here. This security arrangement is costly as increased government spending must be covered by raising taxes or through deficit spending or a combination of both. Sustainability is the question here. If GDP decreases and/or if the deficit increases as a percentage of the GDP then at some point we will only be able to service the interest payments while the debt remains to burden future generations.
Anyway, manipulation of the dollar is advantageous in that as a reserve currency it allows us as a country to borrow money at a significantly less cost than other countries. Other countries simply underwrite our debt. This significant low cost of borrowing leads to a form of prosperity. And today, we see some of the fruit of that so-called debt-based prosperity.
The bad news is when the dollar loses its reserve status then one effect will be that the costs of borrowing will increase with a corresponding drop in standard of living. Perhaps prosperity shouldn’t be so narrowly based on a financial system but rather on other factors such as reinvigorating innovation and renewing our manufacturing base.
pot? kettle?
{Personal attack removed}
The lifeblood of the world economy is oil. Barrels of oil are denominated, bought and sold in US dollars. The value of the dollar can influence or control the price of oil. There’s a linkage so that if the dollar goes down in value then the price of a barrel of oil rises inversely.
This hegemony of the dollar is roughly synonymous with ‘empire’. The ‘empire’ is built on the status of the US dollar (or the Federal Reserve Note) as the reserve currency of the world, a status which actually began with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system. [There are other factors that reinforce the US dollar as a reserve currency but it increasing appears the world situation is changing to one where another currency or ‘basket’ of currencies will fulfill this role, perhaps around 2018.]
Let me ask you why so many things, including your example oil, are pegged to the US dollar? Could it have anything to do with the fact the US economy since WWII has been the strongest in the world and the most stable? Less than 20 years ago foreign prices were often quoted in two currencies, the British Pound and the Swiss Franc. While both are still viable currencies and have a record of stability they have fallen out of favor with the advent of the Euro which is a blend of the economic value of the nations supporting it and the fact the US is still the largest consumer market in the world. For the past generation we have pumped so much of our money overseas it has become the de facto standard against which all other currencies are valued. The paradigm which made the US currency the strongest in the world is now beginning to shift. Which currency will replace the dollar as the world standard is unknown at this point.
But let’s look at the situation now. We underwrite the security of the key Gulf States, mainly OPEC countries. What about Iraq? Was it actually a threat to the US? Or, was it more a threat to Saudi Arabia? BTW, did you know that one of the highest consumers of oil is the US military and that BP is a major supplier? Anyway, the regimes who benefit from the Middle East security arrangement allow the denomination of petroleum in US dollars.
Did you really care who provided the US military with their fuel in April or are you on a rant because their contractor was sloppy and didn't have safeguards in place on the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform?
Look around, we also provide more than one security umbrella. Another is the Far East protecting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Think high tech here. This security arrangement is costly as increased government spending must be covered by raising taxes or through deficit spending or a combination of both. Sustainability is the question here. If GDP decreases and/or if the deficit increases as a percentage of the GDP then at some point we will only be able to service the interest payments while the debt remains to burden future generations.
Let's see - the agreements to base troops in the Far East rose out of wars. First there was the Spanish-American war which allowed us into the Philippines. Those treaties were abrogated in the 1980's with the closing of the last US military installations at Subic Bay and Clark AFB. Basing of troops in Japan was a result of World War II. Protection of Taiwan the result of an agreement between what was the Chinese government at the end of WWII in repayment of the assistance provided against what was our then common foe. You conveniently gloss over the reason for the establishment of our protection to support an argument that we should return to an isolationist policy.
Anyway, manipulation of the dollar is advantageous in that as a reserve currency it allows us as a country to borrow money at a significantly less cost than other countries. Other countries simply underwrite our debt. This significant low cost of borrowing leads to a form of prosperity. And today, we see some of the fruit of that so-called debt-based prosperity.
The bad news is when the dollar loses its reserve status then one effect will be that the costs of borrowing will increase with a corresponding drop in standard of living. Perhaps prosperity shouldn’t be so narrowly based on a financial system but rather on other factors such as reinvigorating innovation and renewing our manufacturing base.
Which truly is the point. The dominance of the American dollar is receding. We have purchased so much abroad that we can't even truly call our country our own anymore. Many of our "American" icons are owned by countries and investors that are not American by any sense of the word. We could do as some other countries have done, nationalize everything and steal their investments, but then that would also spark your outrage that we Americans would act as some dictator. But then again, don't we need to close our borders and retreat from being the world's policeman in order to meet your isolationist views?
Illiterate? Write for free help.
.
There's a long way to go from cutting overseas military spending and being isolationist. Our overseas allies now have very low military budgets because of our protective umbrella. They spend, as a proportion of their GDP, less than half of what we do on defense. We are subsidizing their taxpayers. If we cut our overseas spending, they would have to step up and pay their fair share.
We spend on the military four times the amount of all our potential adversaries combined. Here is a quote from http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/14/opinion/la-oe-0614-p...
"We are surrounded by vast seas and friendly neighbors. But our military spending is nearly equal to half the world's, and our allies spend most of the other half. Russia, China, North Korea, Syria and Iran collectively spend about a fourth of what we do on defense, according to statistics compiled by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Even if we cut our military in half, it would still be far bigger than that of any conceivable rival."
nuvi 200 | lifetime maps
This is gonna be fun.
I don't much care for dood's general aggressive hostility, but this statement is particularly troublesome: "Why dont you present some particular 'budget' item and we can go from there.
I bet you have no problem with hussains stimulus that has FAILED."
Ya..I asked..And I'm still waiting..
And as I look up at his post..nope..he doesnt take it up..He just 'moveson'(.org).
1) It is common knowledge that Congress gives the Pentagon programs and money it doesn't want or need. The latest is a fighter, the F35 I think, not wanted by the Pentagon, but passed by Congress. The reason? Congressmen want the jobs in their districts created by the contractors and sub-contractors. Industry purposely spreads production over as many districts as possible to gain Congressional allies. In effect, it is a stimulus program.
I'm going to assume your talking about the latest F-22.
Yup...gates cancelled the orders.
But..low and behold..those 'evil job creators' simply moved on to fullfill orders of the F-35.(Expecting them to be up to operational levels by 2012).
We can debate 'cost per' and capabilities all day..but to settle this issue on 'congressmen wanting jobs' is but a drop in the bucket.
You DO know that lockheed sells to our allies too..right?
2) We all know what you are getting at with the "hussain" thing. Grow up. If you have a good enough argument, you don't need to use immature tactics. And, if you are such a loyal patriot as you are trying to appear, you would treat the highest elected U.S. official with appropriate respect, at least in addressing him properly.
Ok then..its MR. HUSSAIN.
(It IS his name afterall. I didnt see anybody crying over calling bush 'W'...or 'Dubbya'.
The growing up is required by those that refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that...ITS HIS NAME.)
3) Only those who are content to stay ignorant of the facts say that the Economic Recovery Act (aka stimulus) has failed. Here are the facts from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO): http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967
BWwahahahaha.....
Ya...nice try.
You know the CBO is constrained by the data given by congress..right?
Just like the hussaincare.
First..it was deficit neutral.
Then..it was a few hundred million.
Now..its above 1 TRILLION.
But hey! The CBO said blah..blah..blah...
And that was based on the info/restrictions by congress.
So using the CBO is hardly a worthy defense.
Rather than completely tearing up the 'PORKULAS', which is quite easy..and can be demostratated with any number of facts and figures.
Let me ask YOU...
Please present one tangable benefit from the 'stimulus'. (I assure you it will be alot tougher than it will be for me to disprove anything you present)
The problem now is that the stimulus was not large enough.
Bwwahahahahhaha
Ya...and 'unemployment checks stimulate the economy'
(Nancy The Red)
Big fan of keynsian econ I see.
Again..justify the first waste of cash before you go off trying to justify more.
HINT: Building on a foundation of mud isnt the wisest thing to do.
At the time it was passed, the president and the congressional Democrats wanted a bigger stimulus, but the Republicans, as usual, were in their "no" mode. We need more stimulus now, as the president and Democrats have been saying, but the Republicans are, as usual, in their "no" mode. Everyone with a PhD in economics will tell you that the only way to goose the economy when consumers and businesses are not spending is with government spending. And, in the long run, that will decrease deficits because of increased tax revenues.
Let me guess..'priming the pump'
(CNN has taught you poorly young padawan.)
This was tried before..IT FAILED. You may have heard of it. It was call the new deal.
Now then..I understand the mentality. Even tho its an economic failure..both under FDR and abroad...you guys just think you havent done enough of it yet. Right?
Again..justify your position.
(I'll be waiting for your 'shovel ready jobs', your pointing to hussain's 'claim's of job creations..and the fictitious and downright deceitful 'save or created' metric that economists laugh at and knows its impossible to quantify).
Nuvi 350 Born Oct 07 - Nuvi 660 Unit #2 (re)Born Sept 08 - Nuvi 360(Gift to 'the chick' yet maintained by myself) Born July 08
Gee...
Get bent hippy.
Oh yeah, you got me pegged there, chief.
Thanks!!
Higher level thinking isn’t your forte, is it? If you weren’t lacking in the reading comprehension department you’d see that there is cohesive link between the ideas here but you seem stuck on latching onto something that isn’t there, like some loony talk about hostility towards the military. Perhaps you’re showing signs of paranoia or some other mental disorder, huh?
And what 'idea's would those be?
Give it a name.
The lifeblood of the world economy is oil. Barrels of oil are denominated, bought and sold in US dollars. The value of the dollar can influence or control the price of oil. There’s a linkage so that if the dollar goes down in value then the price of a barrel of oil rises inversely.
Which is why the valuation of the dollar is critical.
Let me know how hussains spending helps that?
Devaluing the dollar with the spending...by hussain...isnt working out so well now is it?
BTW...get ready for a doubled down recession come january. (BET ON IT)
Bush's tax cuts will expire..and we have a whole new basket of new taxes.
Let me know when you discover the formula of taxing a country into prosperity.
This hegemony of the dollar is roughly synonymous with ‘empire’.
Ahhh...'roughly'.
I guess we are 'evil' because the dollar became currency of choice.
Are you bitter about this?
What is your alternative? A world currency?(I expect an answer)
Because the consolidation of europes currency to the euro isnt working out very well ya know.
The ‘empire’ is built on the status of the US dollar (or the Federal Reserve Note) as the reserve currency of the world, a status which actually began with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system. [There are other factors that reinforce the US dollar as a reserve currency but it increasing appears the world situation is changing to one where another currency or ‘basket’ of currencies will fulfill this role, perhaps around 2018.]
And lets examine 'why' we face such a potential.
Would it be because we may soon not be able to back up those notes?
Why...YES IT IS!!
Your not offering any revelations here. If hussain keeps 'priming the pump' the dollar will become less valuable. ECON 101
Because you see..the RISK you describe can only be brought on by our own hand.
But let’s look at the situation now. We underwrite the security of the key Gulf States, mainly OPEC countries. What about Iraq? Was it actually a threat to the US? Or, was it more a threat to Saudi Arabia? BTW, did you know that one of the highest consumers of oil is the US military and that BP is a major supplier? Anyway, the regimes who benefit from the Middle East security arrangement allow the denomination of petroleum in US dollars.
A tenuous arrangement at best...
Look around, we also provide more than one security umbrella. Another is the Far East protecting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Think high tech here. This security arrangement is costly as increased government spending must be covered by raising taxes or through deficit spending or a combination of both. Sustainability is the question here. If GDP decreases and/or if the deficit increases as a percentage of the GDP then at some point we will only be able to service the interest payments while the debt remains to burden future generations.
Correct. (Then why do you want more spending?..BILLIONS in spending. Cognitive dissonance perhaps?)
Anyway, manipulation of the dollar is advantageous in that as a reserve currency it allows us as a country to borrow money at a significantly less cost than other countries. Other countries simply underwrite our debt. This significant low cost of borrowing leads to a form of prosperity. And today, we see some of the fruit of that so-called debt-based prosperity.
The bad news is when the dollar loses its reserve status then one effect will be that the costs of borrowing will increase with a corresponding drop in standard of living. Perhaps prosperity shouldn’t be so narrowly based on a financial system but rather on other factors such as reinvigorating innovation and renewing our manufacturing base.
Well..thanks for the lesson.
Its not something we dont know.
Yet..throughout your lecturing, you still dont make your point. Nor do you address the original issues at hand.
Basically..you typed alot..but said nothing. I bet your proud of yourself too. Give yourself a trophy. (And dont forget to give the same trophy to the other 'winners' in the room..because 'we are all winners'! right? Bwwahahahah)
Personally..if I were 'grading' you in a debate...you'd fail.
Reason: Avoids the issues.
Thanks for playing tho...
Nuvi 350 Born Oct 07 - Nuvi 660 Unit #2 (re)Born Sept 08 - Nuvi 360(Gift to 'the chick' yet maintained by myself) Born July 08
Have a great week!
Have a great week!
.
dood,
This is from the CBO's website:
CBO's mandate is to provide the Congress with
objective, nonpartisan, and timely analyses to aid in economic and budgetary decisions on the wide array of programs covered by the federal budget and the information and estimates required for the Congressional budget process.
Here is a record of their accuracy: http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=1486&type=0
No one, except you, questions their objectivity.
All you have presented as evidence are the imaginings of your confused mind. I believe that it is less reliable than the CBO. No one cares about your unsupported opinion. Let us know when you come up with numbers from a more respected source. Otherwise, I think that I will stick with this regarding the stimulus: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967.
nuvi 200 | lifetime maps
Have a great week all!
Have a great week all!
Con't
-snap-
Seeing the problem is not the same as admitting to know the solutions. One difficulty in talking about the situation is the ‘double bind’ that results.
I don’t claim to know the solutions only that it appears to involve getting government growth and spending under control which means at a minimum, “no more blank checks”. We have to pursue austerity measures since we don’t have the resources for both bread and war.
But, for all I know, the means to get through this mess might take walking in the opposite direction for awhile before proceeding the other way to safety. For instance, some have advocated for a public state bank along the lines of what is present in North Dakota (google this).
No one’s advocating for abolishing the standing army or for total withdrawal (isolationism). All I’m saying is step back from the knee jerk reaction of a strict interventionist approach.
Maybe we’re already in this transition. Downsizing is not a partisan issue. The Bush/Cheney administration witnessed the acceleration in privatization of the military. What any administration should do is not shortchange the veterans!
As I understand, the Obama administration and the previous Bush administration jointly oversaw the transfer of funds to the private, “too big to fail” banks so that these entities would remain solvent and promote cash flow to stimulate the economy. I don’t have the data at hand but by repurchasing mortgages it appears that the depression of property values may have been stemmed but, like you said, if we’re seeing a ‘head and shoulders’ pattern of a double dip recession (depression) then this roller coaster ain’t over yet.
Lastly, I don’t play that partisan game. Everything’s not as simple as that, likewise, with the ‘good’ and ‘evil’ terminology. But, I do appreciate the contribution of veterans. FWI, you’re a tenuous SOB, reminds me of a snapping turtle
can we please keep the
can we please keep the discussions on topic and away from politics.
Miss POI