Usa going down

[TrueGrit]

Nobody seems to be mentioning anything about the USA dept,well I will tell ya you better be prepared ,this is going to have a huge impact on Canada and the rest of the world

Its checkmate for the mighty superpower

[WCTHEMI]

What about the USA dept? Haven't heard anything about that in the news.

[Hooter]

What about the USA dept? Haven't heard anything about that in the news.

He means "debt", not "dept".

[TrueGrit]

Sorry for the mis spelling ya it was rejected by the senate (house)

USA will defalt sooner or later shts going to hit the fan they should just let it happen tuesday and get it over with

The gig is up Federal reserve /IMF

Hope you ya,ll have been loading up on Gold/Silver

[sikwhiskey]

Sorry for the mis spelling ya it was rejected by the senate (house)

USA will defalt sooner or later shts going to hit the fan they should just let it happen tuesday and get it over with

The gig is up Federal reserve /IMF

Hope you ya,ll have been loading up on Gold/Silver

Bound to happen sooner or later. Would want to be owed anything from the U.S GOVT. you will never see it.

[dodger]

Yep !! We are in for a big BoBo here in Canada from this. Strap up your buddies as this is going to be a rough ride.

Dodger.

[Fletch10]

Its all just political posturing for the election next November. The President has the ability to over rule the house/senate one time without having to gain a confidence vote. So if they can't come to an agreement then likely he will step in and raise the debt ceiling and avoid defaulting on the loans for awhile yet allowing them more time to get something figured out.

[wwbirds]

My son was talking to a friend of his with 12 years with airforce as instructor and the whole base of NCO's was apparently given a reprimand and released with no notice or pension on Thursday.

[alwaysfishn]

Its all just political posturing for the election next November. The President has the ability to over rule the house/senate one time without having to gain a confidence vote. So if they can't come to an agreement then likely he will step in and raise the debt ceiling and avoid defaulting on the loans for awhile yet allowing them more time to get something figured out.

Exactly! The US constitution prevents them from defaulting on their debt. Both sides are just posturing so that they can blame the other side in the next election.

[eastcoast]

the usa is in deep trouble and not just because of this because of alot of things,it's going to be a bumpy 20 years for them.

[pattycr125]

thats what you get for putting your trust in the government.

[bearbait]

ya the us is in big trouble..trying to get firearms and ammo is a huge pain due to the loss of credit from banks to manufactures..we will be seeing more and more issues trying to get stuff to canada as time gose on..savage for instance is so far behind that some orders could be over a year to get

[Samhael]

It's not just the posturing for the next election, the USA is in HUGE trouble $14,554,200,000,000 total debt 14.55 trillion, ~$47,000 per citizen, GDP of $14.7 trillion. 99% of it's GDP. :scared0018:


In order to balance it's books it needs to cut expenses and increase revenue: higher taxes and layoffs. It's not just about votes and the next election.

To pay off it's debt, sell it's assets. :thinking-006:

It's Greece, no denying it. Wait for Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Iceland, to catch up, all are in huge trouble. :snapoutofit:

What can be done? The US has already spent a huge amount of "stimulus" dollars, it cut interest rates to a minimum, none of this has created jobs. It should have allowed a correction, a deep recession, and instead it's now heading to a depression.

Save your money, payoff your debt, because this will happen and when it does, be ready. :scared0018:

[Ken07AOVette]

The USA has a war based economy, the only time they make money is when they are at war. In the shape they are in, will it be a civil war once the crime spikes, or will they eventually snap and try to take over Canada?

Myself personally, would like to see Canada become Montana North just long enough for all existing archaiec treaties, immigration and welfare programs to be null and void, new boss new rules, then the next day release Canada back with a brand new empty playbook, and an Election.

Basically the way we are now, but bypassing the war and starting with a clean slate would be wonderful. No more handouts, which would cause people to find and sustain employment, make them gain respect for them selves, and tighten everything up.

Oh and make Quebec seperate. :)

[great white whaler]

'wars cost money ',,,maybe terrorism is winning,,bin ladin is dead ''al qaeda is still here waiting to devour weakness.

[Ianhntr]

Whoa what a scary thread. In our day and age when most city dwellers don't realise a steak was walking a little ways back, and cauliflowers came from seeds, just what is coming?
Personally, I hope that cooler heads prevail, and they pull in the reins. Raise their limit, but start on some dam serious cutbacks. It makes no nevermind in the big scheme though since the damage has pretty much been done. Gold through the roof and our retirement investments toasted.

[251251]

Apple Inc has more money now than the US Gov't. http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/29/apples-assets-beat-uncle-ams/
Obama's "Recovery Summer" became a recovery bummer, costing almost $250,000 per job created, but eliminating hundred of thousands more than were made.
If the US wants another black president, they should vote for Hermain Cain. He may not have political experience (like Obama had much. Spending more time on his campaign then being an acting senator), but Mr. Cain is a businessman who has taken many large companies from almost bankruptcy to thriving businesses. He may be the president the US needs right now.

I am no ecnomist, but it seems that a Cut, Cap and Balance bill the GOP brought passed in he house would be the best. Obama said he would veto the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill. Then he said he would veto the Boehner Plan bill. And he has the nerve to say the GOP is uncompromising!

President B.O. may be able to make great speeches, but he can't talk his way out of this mess.

[Redfrog]

It is like a poor reality show. Things are worse than bad and if the emperor who has never run any kind of business is in charge of running a country.

I'll tell you what this a cluster on steroids. It isn't just the runaway debt, there are some serious problems in the U.S. society and no one has the testicular fortitude to fix it. They should have elected Hilary Dickery, Clingon. At least she's got sensible shoes.:thinking-006:

[ishootbambi]

Apple Inc has more money now than the US Gov't. .

so do i!!!!! i have a crisp shiny tenspot in my pocket........that puts me about 14 trillion and 10 bucks ahead. :sHa_sarcasticlol: :sHa_shakeshout:

[ishootbambi]

They should have elected Hilary Dickery, Clingon. At least she's got sensible shoes.:thinking-006:

i dont think they were allowed. arent you only allowed 2 terms max? :sHa_sarcasticlol:

[hal53]

i dont think they were allowed. arent you only allowed 2 terms max? :sHa_sarcasticlol:
HE was, SHE ran against Obama for the Dem. nomination....

[bb356]

USA GOING DOWN ........ yah right ........ ain't gonna happen !!!

[eastcoast]

the truth is obama had little to do with the current state of the economy, he is just the guy holding the bag when it falters, the us has been borrowing for a very long time and in sustained decefits for most of the last 70 years, the bills come do eventually, and if people really wanted to fix it they would elect ron paul.

[BGSH]

The truth is this world has to many bad in it and not enough good, forget about the debt issue and go fishing, have fun.

[rugatika]

the truth is obama had little to do with the current state of the economy, he is just the guy holding the bag when it falters, the us has been borrowing for a very long time and in sustained decefits for most of the last 70 years, the bills come do eventually, and if people really wanted to fix it they would elect ron paul.

Look at the numbers my friend. Obama has everything to do with the current state of the economy. He tried to resuscitate a failing economy by spending his way out of it. FAIL. http://blog.heritage.org/2011/07/28/the-truth-about-obamas-budget-deficits-in-pictures/

http://msmamasramblings.wordpress.com/2011/07/31/nancy-pelosi-savior-of-the-world/

Obama and the democrats have been the spendiest gov in the history of the US. Exemplified by pelosis insistence on her own 757, Obamas trips, (he has to be the golfingest Pres ever), and so on. Just look at the size of gov under the current admin...the US economy may have been on cruise control headed for disaster, but Obama got behind the wheel and took it off cruise and floored it.

Bush was spending money at a crazy rate under a growing economy...Obama has been spending money at over twice that rate under a shrinking or stagnant economy.

[ishootbambi]

HE was, SHE ran against Obama for the Dem. nomination....

i thought the emoticon would get the intent across. what im saying is that she is a terrific ventriloquist....i didnt even see the strings on old boner billy.....:sHa_sarcasticlol:

[hal53]

i thought the emoticon would get the intent across. what im saying is that she is a terrific ventriloquist....i didnt even see the strings on old boner billy.....:sHa_sarcasticlol:
was defining that before RHF came back under yet another alias.....

[Garry B]

There have been a lot of very good posts here.

Yes, IMO the current impasse is pure political posturing. Career politicians who know nothing about running business playing games with other people's money for the own ends. What they do or don't do this go-around won't save the country. Lots of pain ahead for them.

As a country the U.S. have lived beyond their means for far too long. They have sought global empire for too long (a military presence in 800 countries world wide). Their central bank has printed too much money since it came into existence (destroying more than 95% of the value of the dollar since the creation of the Federal Reserve). They have allowed their manufacturing base to contract severely to the point they (and much of the world) are dependant on China for cheap goods. Her treasury is supported by China and Japan. Medical costs are exorbitant. Their country is litigious to the extreme - costs for things are jacked up to protect from lawsuits. They have had problems for years but the problem has never been this extensive before.

In fairness many advanced countries today share very similar problems.

Now their economy is a shell of its former self. The government debt level has gone parabolic and they won't be able to pay it off. Their only solution is to inflate their way out but the two latest efforts by Bernanke have fizzled for the most part only having only juiced the stock market (a very direct inverse correlation between the USD and the stock market exists - they move in opposite directions) and caused gold to advance steadily higher not to mention commodities and food at the store. Unemployment is very high (ironically despite this high employers in many fields report difficulty finding employees with appropriate skills). At present he doesn't seem willing to try a third round of quantitative easing and for a man like Bernanke not to be willing to do this it possibly shows he recognizes the futility he faces. As bad as Greenspan was he has been eclipsed by Ben.

With declining economic power comes declining military power. I expect to see a less dominant U.S. in the future.

Most American people can forget about retiring and should plan on working a long time (Wisconsin chopped union rights and cut pensions of public employees and negotiated far less generous contracts with new workers). A city in California went bankrupt and reopened with a much smaller public employee base.

I don't have a crystal ball but I would expect an inflationary crackup before a deflationary collapse. More money printing. More rising prices. But who knows for sure. All I can say for sure is even Canadian people's savings are being eroded daily and we don't even live down there. We have no crises to fix here and already BoC numbers are inflation is above 3%. Canadian government bonds won't get you a return close to that. Banks pay nothing near. You must find other investment vehicles if you want to preserve the purchasing power of your money.

The U.S. isn’t going down, they have gone down a lot already. The question is how much further do they drop?

As you can probably tell I'm not a professional economist so take what I said with a grain of salt ...

[IR_mike]

As a country the U.S. have lived beyond their means for far too long. They have sought global empire for too long (a military presence in 800 countries world wide).

I dont think there are 800 countries in the whole world.

[Digger1]

Last week the IMF said in 5 years China will be replacing the US as the leading world economic superpower. Not surprising, as now the interest payments alone the US pays China is enough to fund their entire military.

[Garry B]

I dont think there are 800 countries in the whole world.

First slip. You are right. Thanks.

More than 800 bases in 63 countries:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5564
Ron Paul quotes the more than 800 figure often.

[deanmc]

It's not just the posturing for the next election, the USA is in HUGE trouble $14,554,200,000,000 total debt 14.55 trillion, ~$47,000 per citizen, GDP of $14.7 trillion. 99% of it's GDP. :scared0018:


In order to balance it's books it needs to cut expenses and increase revenue: higher taxes and layoffs. It's not just about votes and the next election.

To pay off it's debt, sell it's assets. :thinking-006:

It's Greece, no denying it. Wait for Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Iceland, to catch up, all are in huge trouble. :snapoutofit:

What can be done? The US has already spent a huge amount of "stimulus" dollars, it cut interest rates to a minimum, none of this has created jobs. It should have allowed a correction, a deep recession, and instead it's now heading to a depression.

Save your money, payoff your debt, because this will happen and when it does, be ready. :scared0018:

I wish my debt was only one years gross income.

[hal53]

GDP and annual income are vastly different things.....

[Garry B]

For all the negatives, seems like people bought the S&P 500 index fund pretty hard when the market dropped on open Friday. Market putting in some type of bottom? Pins and needles for Monday.

[whitetail Junkie]

For all the negatives, seems like people bought the S&P 500 index fund pretty hard when the market dropped on open Friday. Market putting in some type of bottom? Pins and needles for Monday.

Moved all my High risk mutual Funds into a GIC on Friday,aswell sold All My Company stocks....:jawsmiley:

[BallCoeff.435]

There have been a lot of very good posts here.

Yes, IMO the current impasse is pure political posturing. Career politicians who know nothing about running business playing games with other people's money for the own ends. What they do or don't do this go-around won't save the country. Lots of pain ahead for them.

As a country the U.S. have lived beyond their means for far too long. [...]

You hit the nail on the head bro, on every point. The only other thing to mention is that Canadian housing is due for a [further] nosedive as artificially low interest rates correct back up, as the boomers retire and try to cash out their real estate to support themselves, as younger buyers are priced wayyyy the hell out of the market, and as unemployment and underemployment spreads. Too Much Debt - of all kinds, supports luxury living the likes of which we've never seen before in history. Even during the NEP days.

[eastcoast]

Look at the numbers my friend. Obama has everything to do with the current state of the economy. He tried to resuscitate a failing economy by spending his way out of it. FAIL. http://blog.heritage.org/2011/07/28/the-truth-about-obamas-budget-deficits-in-pictures/

http://msmamasramblings.wordpress.com/2011/07/31/nancy-pelosi-savior-of-the-world/

Obama and the democrats have been the spendiest gov in the history of the US. Exemplified by pelosis insistence on her own 757, Obamas trips, (he has to be the golfingest Pres ever), and so on. Just look at the size of gov under the current admin...the US economy may have been on cruise control headed for disaster, but Obama got behind the wheel and took it off cruise and floored it.

Bush was spending money at a crazy rate under a growing economy...Obama has been spending money at over twice that rate under a shrinking or stagnant economy.

you can blame obama all you want because of your ideology that's fine but the fact is he inherited a terrible economy just going into massive recession,2 wars and alot of debt, sure he did a few things wrong im not saying he is innocent in all of this, but to blame obama and nobody else is foolish the us has been borrowing money since the end of ww2,the 2 biggest borrowers before obama are reghan and bush jr,the 2 least borrowers are carter and clinton,so it's not really a left vs right issue it's a living beyond your means issue and time has come for some major changes.

[rugatika]

you can blame obama all you want because of your ideology that's fine but the fact is he inherited a terrible economy just going into massive recession,2 wars and alot of debt, sure he did a few things wrong im not saying he is innocent in all of this, but to blame obama and nobody else is foolish the us has been borrowing money since the end of ww2,the 2 biggest borrowers before obama are reghan and bush jr,the 2 least borrowers are carter and clinton,so it's not really a left vs right issue it's a living beyond your means issue and time has come for some major changes.

I think we've gone round this circle before. You can say ideology, whatever. Fact of the matter is look what Reagan did with his spending. First he had a democrat congress to deal with AND look at the inflation and unemployment numbers he inherited from Jimmy Carter, second he collapsed the Soviet Union by outspending them. HE WON THE FRIGGIN COLD WAR!! CLinton started out on a spending spree until Gingrich and republicans got in and reigned him in to some extent.

Secondly...I don't exclusively blame Obama...if you read my post I clearly state the US economy has been on a path to economic trouble for a long time...but the numbers DO NOT LIE. Obama took a crappy economy and turned it into a great big CRAP sandwich. Just look at his spending...how does it even compare to George Bush Jr...a person I clearly say was spending too much.

You can support Obama and the democrats all you want because of your ideology, but the numbers don't lie.

Funny, I never hear anyone mention Bush inheriting a recession from Clinton...but he did. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-80312 You know why nobody mentions it? Because Bush didn't spend 3 years whining about it...he did something about it...he cut taxes. He didn't go on an insane spending spree for the Sisyphusian purpose of stimulating the economy. Yes, he spent money on things like drug care plans, and the war on terror. But he didn't even come close to Obama's level of money burning.

AND what's more...Obama's anti-business rants are scaring the bejeebus out of the very people that would otherwise be investing in economic growth in the USA. Listen to Steve Wynn if you haven't already heard it...an avowed democrat that supported Obama. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FATx3ijm_xg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZcMzL0Hx9M&feature=related

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/planet-310129-life-know.html

[kennedy]

Well, one of the objectives of Osama Bin Laden was to make the USA bankrupt by involving them in a bunch of expensive small wars.:budo:

[Cal]

I think we've gone round this circle before. You can say ideology, whatever. Fact of the matter is look what Reagan did with his spending. First he had a democrat congress to deal with AND look at the inflation and unemployment numbers he inherited from Jimmy Carter, second he collapsed the Soviet Union by outspending them. HE WON THE FRIGGIN COLD WAR!! CLinton started out on a spending spree until Gingrich and republicans got in and reigned him in to some extent.

Secondly...I don't exclusively blame Obama...if you read my post I clearly state the US economy has been on a path to economic trouble for a long time...but the numbers DO NOT LIE. Obama took a crappy economy and turned it into a great big CRAP sandwich. Just look at his spending...how does it even compare to George Bush Jr...a person I clearly say was spending too much.

You can support Obama and the democrats all you want because of your ideology, but the numbers don't lie.

Funny, I never hear anyone mention Bush inheriting a recession from Clinton...but he did. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-80312 You know why nobody mentions it? Because Bush didn't spend 3 years whining about it...he did something about it...he cut taxes. He didn't go on an insane spending spree for the Sisyphusian purpose of stimulating the economy. Yes, he spent money on things like drug care plans, and the war on terror. But he didn't even come close to Obama's level of money burning.

AND what's more...Obama's anti-business rants are scaring the bejeebus out of the very people that would otherwise be investing in economic growth in the USA. Listen to Steve Wynn if you haven't already heard it...an avowed democrat that supported Obama. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FATx3ijm_xg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZcMzL0Hx9M&feature=related

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/planet-310129-life-know.html

Obama just tryed to do what Teddy Rosevelt did, unfortunatly it didnt work this time. Taking on huge debt to stimulate the economy has worked for the United States befor, so has fighting wars. This time neither strategy worked, IMO because this time they had dug themselves too deep through irisponsible fiscal practices befor they even admited they had problems. And as bad as them falling sounds I think its going to be worse than that, how does everyone feel about living next to New China?

[eastcoast]

I think we've gone round this circle before. You can say ideology, whatever. Fact of the matter is look what Reagan did with his spending. First he had a democrat congress to deal with AND look at the inflation and unemployment numbers he inherited from Jimmy Carter, second he collapsed the Soviet Union by outspending them. HE WON THE FRIGGIN COLD WAR!! CLinton started out on a spending spree until Gingrich and republicans got in and reigned him in to some extent.

Secondly...I don't exclusively blame Obama...if you read my post I clearly state the US economy has been on a path to economic trouble for a long time...but the numbers DO NOT LIE. Obama took a crappy economy and turned it into a great big CRAP sandwich. Just look at his spending...how does it even compare to George Bush Jr...a person I clearly say was spending too much.

You can support Obama and the democrats all you want because of your ideology, but the numbers don't lie.

Funny, I never hear anyone mention Bush inheriting a recession from Clinton...but he did. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-80312 You know why nobody mentions it? Because Bush didn't spend 3 years whining about it...he did something about it...he cut taxes. He didn't go on an insane spending spree for the Sisyphusian purpose of stimulating the economy. Yes, he spent money on things like drug care plans, and the war on terror. But he didn't even come close to Obama's level of money burning.

AND what's more...Obama's anti-business rants are scaring the bejeebus out of the very people that would otherwise be investing in economic growth in the USA. Listen to Steve Wynn if you haven't already heard it...an avowed democrat that supported Obama. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FATx3ijm_xg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZcMzL0Hx9M&feature=related

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/planet-310129-life-know.html

I get it anything good was because of th right and anything bad is because of the left no matter the numbers,and if im so far left why did I say that if they wanted to fix it to elect ron paul? the only economic conservative on the right wing?

[eastcoast]

Well, one of the objectives of Osama Bin Laden was to make the USA bankrupt by involving them in a bunch of expensive small wars.:budo:he did say that and it's partially true.take out the money and you take away the power.

[eastcoast]

this is a very good video to explain some of this stuff to people,warning foul language.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkxcCeuKTCw&feature=channel_video_title

[Bucky]

Take a look at the link below, it shows in comparisons just how much money they owe. Makes it seem even more crazy,

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

[The Elkster]

The right and the left are both screwed up in the US. They are bought and paid for by a corrupt system they still believe is democracy hardy har har.

I would say the stimulus may have worked to some extent it depends on how you look at it. Sure employment didn't go up but if it meant 2million jobs were lost instead of 20million I'd say that it worked...at least temporarily. In the end of the day the system is still broke though. I believe they need a big collapse before people will be fully embracing of change.

[eastcoast]

The right and the left are both screwed up in the US. They are bought and paid for by a corrupt system they still believe is democracy hardy har har.

I would say the stimulus may have worked to some extent it depends on how you look at it. Sure employment didn't go up but if it meant 2million jobs were lost instead of 20million I'd say that it worked...at least temporarily. In the end of the day the system is still broke though. I believe they need a big collapse before people will be fully embracing of change.

the stimulous only delayed the pain really.

[Garry B]

Take a look at the link below, it shows in comparisons just how much money they owe. Makes it seem even more crazy,

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

That is a striking image of a very big hole that they won't dig themselves out of expect by inflating out.

Here is a less visual but quite detailed look at the numbers they are dealing with:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[great white whaler]

oprah winfrey as about 6 billion dollars maybe she can help out move stars and musicians help to ............than again why should the rich pay.

[Garry B]

... as younger buyers are priced wayyyy the hell out of the market, ...

I feel for the younger generation. I see so many young familys with average to decent jobs and both spouses need to work to be able to afford a town house. They are not living large. Comfortable yes, but not extravagant. When my parents grew up families could get by on the income of the father and they raised more kids to boot. Having said that they didn't have nearly the great stuff we have today.

Too Much Debt - of all kinds, supports luxury living the likes of which we've never seen before in history.

Makes me think of the boom we just went through. I remember so many ads for granite counter tops in houses that weren't the mansions you used to find them in. Seemed like that was the new norm and if you had something else you were poor.

Have I contradicted myself above?

[rugatika]

Obama just tryed to do what Teddy Rosevelt did, unfortunatly it didnt work this time. Taking on huge debt to stimulate the economy has worked for the United States befor, so has fighting wars. This time neither strategy worked, IMO because this time they had dug themselves too deep through irisponsible fiscal practices befor they even admited they had problems. And as bad as them falling sounds I think its going to be worse than that, how does everyone feel about living next to New China?

I think you mean Teddy's cousin, FDR and his new deal. At any rate, there is debate as to whether FDR's social welfare programs pulled the US out of the depression or not. Tough to prove one way or another...some people say it prolonged the depression, some say it didn't. http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Man-History-Great-Depression/dp/0066211700 Great read on the topic. I agree with you that regardless if you believe in Keynesian economics or not, any fiscal manoueverability has long ago been lost by the hole the USA has dug itself into, from successive governmental growth and spending beyond its means. Much like Reagan was able to collapse the USSR by outspending them, the USA now finds itself in a similar situation.

And Eastcoast I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul has to say as far as being a fiscal conservative, although I think he is somewhat unpragmatic in his international isolationist policies. As to Obama's spending...and your contention that I am carrying water for Republicans...I have said repeatedly that Bush was spending toooo much. BUT, he was doing so in a growing economy, and his spending was an order of magnitude less than Obama is doing in a stagnant economy. If you think the numbers don't agree with me I'd like to see them.

There are two things a government can do to "effect" wealth in a country: they can create a stable atmosphere that encourages private enterprise to expand, OR they can create an unstable atmosphere that encourages private enterpise to sit on their capital while waiting to see what the future holds. I'll leave you to figure out what the current admin is doing and what previous admins did. Expanding government does not "create" wealth...it consumes it.


To be fair... opposing views on FDR's new deal policies for those interested in extra reading...lol.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/100239
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3357
http://money.usnews.com/money/business-economy/articles/2008/04/11/did-the-new-deal-work

[eastcoast]

I think you mean Teddy's cousin, FDR and his new deal. At any rate, there is debate as to whether FDR's social welfare programs pulled the US out of the depression or not. Tough to prove one way or another...some people say it prolonged the depression, some say it didn't. http://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Man-History-Great-Depression/dp/0066211700 Great read on the topic. I agree with you that regardless if you believe in Keynesian economics or not, any fiscal manoueverability has long ago been lost by the hole the USA has dug itself into, from successive governmental growth and spending beyond its means. Much like Reagan was able to collapse the USSR by outspending them, the USA now finds itself in a similar situation.

And Eastcoast I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul has to say as far as being a fiscal conservative, although I think he is somewhat unpragmatic in his international isolationist policies. As to Obama's spending...and your contention that I am carrying water for Republicans...I have said repeatedly that Bush was spending toooo much. BUT, he was doing so in a growing economy, and his spending was an order of magnitude less than Obama is doing in a stagnant economy. If you think the numbers don't agree with me I'd like to see them.

There are two things a government can do to "effect" wealth in a country: they can create a stable atmosphere that encourages private enterprise to expand, OR they can create an unstable atmosphere that encourages private enterpise to sit on their capital while waiting to see what the future holds. I'll leave you to figure out what the current admin is doing and what previous admins did. Expanding government does not "create" wealth...it consumes it.

obama has made mistakes I never said he was perfect I didn't agree with the stimulus there or here it just prolongs the suffering the markets need to make a correction on their own,the us doesn't have a tax problem they have a spending problem and nobody has the stones to say the truth,well nobody except ron paul, the truth is most people don't want to hear the truth they don't want to hear they have been living above their means for decades,they have spent way too much on wars proving how strong they are,they have let the corporations run the table and write their own laws and loopholes,lots of other problems aswell, they are coming home to roost now and what the politicans are doing is retarded, they are playing games with it,give and inch and then they want more,the right voted for something like 75 increases to the debt celing under bush but won't for obama, they spent like drunken sailers when they were in power and now they are fiscal conservatives?

[backstraps]

Being a subscriper to The Economist, Bloomberg, etc and having read a lot for the last few years, NOT watching most popular radio and newspapers I have a totally different view.

1. as bad as USA debt is it still not even close to many other notable economies such as Britain, Japan, not too mention a lot of European countries.

2. The US has the ability to turn on a dime once momentum flows one way or the other

3. Swiftly developing economies around the world such as China, Brazil, and India are quickly approaching major issues that will more then likely overtake any that USA are experiencing.

4. The debt limit is unique to US and highlights debt that wouldn't mean much in much of the other mentioned economies.

5. China is a country with inflation spiraling out of control and with so much of their data cloaked in mystery it is assumed that things are much worse there then anyone thinks, The debt their banks have are staggering and their engine of growth exporting to developing countries can no longer sustain itselft.

6. Bottom line The US is still the largest economy in the world with the most intellectual property, talent, and infrastructure to do ANYTHING the market moves.


My prediction is that the US will wallow in a period(maybe 2-4 years?) and will rebound at an extraordinary rate when it becomes obvious the developing countries around the world are built on quicksand and have neither the political stability or balanced growth to keep them out of deep trouble. Even China does indeed do what it must and dramatically increase thier domestic consumption guess who stands to benefit? The US has the means to turn around on a dime and begin supplying goods to newly affluent countries as you see currently with our auto manufacturing. I believe that the way Americans live needs and will be downsized but that does not spell the end of the USA as a superpower, in fact it will only allow it to maintain its status.

[Garry B]

Moved all my High risk mutual Funds into a GIC on Friday,aswell sold All My Company stocks....:jawsmiley:

None of us market participants know what the market will do next but I do observe a few things.

1. The SPY opened way down Friday and sagged further before making a decent rally only to give back a lot of it by the close. Still it closed higher than it opened. Volume was very large - and this combined with price closing higher than open indicates to me a lot of support at this level . There was a lot of turnover. That was the fifth day of declines in a very emotionally charged week.

http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n554/garryb_9/justpics/20110731-SPY.png

2. The VIX "Fear Guage" is at extreme levels from which it has often turned back. Much panic last week. Any deal this weekend could relieve fear and we could see the VIX decline and stocks rise.

http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n554/garryb_9/justpics/20110731_-_VIX_Extreme.png

Of course these are just tools used to try gauging the market and no one really knows. The market could still plunge despite being overbought on the VIX. For me I am betting they will get a deal done. One reason is that no one knows what would happen if they default on their debt but none of those politicians want to be the one to blame for not coming to agreement and then finding out some type of financial Armageddon would result. They won't take that risk. We will see a deal done before a default. IMHO. I've been wrong before ... Futures open in 3 hours so that will be our first clue what happens ...

[RandyBoBandy]

I purchased the documentary a few months ago called "the inside job"...go to you tube and search around viewing all the various clips if you don't want to purchase it..STUNNING!! There 5 CREEPS that have run the 3 past governments...they are the same 5 CREEPS that have advised Clinton,Bush and Obama..how they have got away with this crap is beyond me! :scared:

[Redfrog]

"I get it anything good was because of th right and anything bad is because of the left no matter the numbers"

Just when I thought there was little hope for you, you finally get it.:sHa_shakeshout: Congratulations for sticking with it.:)

[Digger1]

I purchased the documentary a few months ago called "the inside job"...go to you tube and search around viewing all the various clips if you don't want to purchase it..STUNNING!! There 5 CREEPS that have run the 3 past governments...they are the same 5 CREEPS that have advised Clinton,Bush and Obama..how they have got away with this crap is beyond me! :scared:

My wife and I just watched Inside Job on Netflix. Astonishing show. A must see

[Redfrog]

oprah winfrey as about 6 billion dollars maybe she can help out move stars and musicians help to ............than again why should the rich pay.

Hey she worked very hard for that money. How about you send some of that cash you got squirreled away to help out?:)

[Map Maker]

Very interesting watching this play out.

i'm suprised no one brought up the US military yet, as i think that is the #1 cash pit for the US.

That would be the easiest thing to slash, if the US was willing to be in NATO and just be another country and just be a voice not the ruling authority.

I see them raising the debt ceiling and printing off more money.

who knows maybe gold will hit 1700 next year.

[Digger1]

Always wondered, when they spend so much money on military stuff and ops, where does the money go? Does it not go into US suppliers and employees?

[Ken07AOVette]

Always wondered, when they spend so much money on military stuff and ops, where does the money go? Does it not go into US suppliers and employees?

Bullets and bombs and fuel and clothing, guns, food, armor.....

[BallCoeff.435]

I feel for the younger generation. I see so many young familys with average to decent jobs and both spouses need to work to be able to afford a town house. They are not living large. Comfortable yes, but not extravagant. When my parents grew up families could get by on the income of the father and they raised more kids to boot. Having said that they didn't have nearly the great stuff we have today.



Makes me think of the boom we just went through. I remember so many ads for granite counter tops in houses that weren't the mansions you used to find them in. Seemed like that was the new norm and if you had something else you were poor.

Have I contradicted myself above?

No contradiction. Not only have the basics been inflated through too-low interest rates and speculation, but people have made it worse for themselves by oversizing and overbuying glitzy stuff on top of it.

People thought they could offset the stagnation in wages since the 1970's, compared to inflation, by overleveraging in real estate. That became a convention, then an expectation to get into hock up to your eyeballs just as long as you made the monthly payments on the whole steaming stinking pile of debt.

Taking out HELOC's like mad, to get that diesel dually and triple-axle fifth wheel monstrosity like the guy across the road has, used maybe 3 weeks a year, not to mention the boat, new golf clubs, the extra car, cuba vacations, hopefully an acreage and a load of plastic consumer crap became the norm. Hollowing out the middle class by sending manufacturing (and engineering) jobs offshore puts constantly more downward pressure on wages. It's created a shortage of decent jobs which just keeps getting worse.

No wonder you need two (or three or four) full-time (paper-shuffling and service work) wage earners per house just to keep above water.

[BallCoeff.435]

Always wondered, when they spend so much money on military stuff and ops, where does the money go? Does it not go into US suppliers and employees?

It's funded by debt, in addition to the debt that's sold to service the interest on previous debt. Debt that's paid for by the taxpayer in the end.

Profits from arms and other materiel is concentrated into the holders of a few stocks of companies which specialize in it. Wages in the few equipment factories needed to make it all are not that great, and only a small portion of the population is needed to make it. It's essentially a cute transfer of present and future wealth from the taxpayer (debt) to stockholders and executives of arms & equipment makers.

[varmit9]

Always wondered, when they spend so much money on military stuff and ops, where does the money go? Does it not go into US suppliers and employees?

I think the USA should send NATO and all the other countries their military has bailed out of trouble, a bill for cost incurred... there more than have the debt payed off.

[SonnyJ]

Little birdie told me that a debt agreement was reached....film @ 11

[FishingMOM]

Deal Struck.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/07/31/debt-talks-sunday.html

[pattycr125]

I think the USA should send NATO and all the other countries their military has bailed out of trouble, a bill for cost incurred... there more than have the debt payed off.

ha thats a laugh

[Jimboy]

USA GOING DOWN ........ yah right ........ ain't gonna happen !!!


x 10 , more wool being pulled over your eyes while they spend miilions over in afganistan .

[bridger2010]

Wow, no tax increase?

[eastcoast]

Wow, no tax increase?

while im not for tax increases 99% of the time this may be a time for an exception, the usa is in deep doo doo and need a durastic change, they need some minor tax increases and major spending cuts asap or this train is coming off the tracks, what we are getting is political games and bs on every level and nobody wants to face the truth.

[Ken07AOVette]

x 10 , more wool being pulled over your eyes while they spend miilions over in afganistan .

Millions? Are you talking per minute or hour?

[rugatika]

while im not for tax increases 99% of the time this may be a time for an exception, the usa is in deep doo doo and need a durastic change, they need some minor tax increases and major spending cuts asap or this train is coming off the tracks, what we are getting is political games and bs on every level and nobody wants to face the truth.

Who are they going to increase taxes on?? Any tax increases are purely going to be for show and not have any meaningful effect on the deficit...yes...its that huge. I heard somewhere that if they taxed all the millionaires and billionaires at 100% it would be spent within a couple months. They US (like many other countries) doesn't have an income problem...they have a spending problem.

Besides, I believe that history has shown that a decrease in tax rates can result in an increase in tax revenue and the opposite can also be true depending on what your starting point is for tax rates...I think the argument can be made that at this point an increase in taxes would have a negative effect on an already stagnant economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/13/who-wants-to-tax-a-millionaire

If they were to increase taxes on anyone it should be on the bottom half of the population who pay NOTHING in taxes. These are the people that keep voting for increases in government spending without having any "skin in the game". If everyone made the connection that voting for a socialist is going to have immediate and negative effects on their income, then maybe the USA (and other countries) wouldn't be where it is today...maybe.

[eastcoast]

Who are they going to increase taxes on?? Any tax increases are purely going to be for show and not have any meaningful effect on the deficit...yes...its that huge. I heard somewhere that if they taxed all the millionaires and billionaires at 100% it would be spent within a couple months. They US (like many other countries) doesn't have an income problem...they have a spending problem.

Besides, I believe that history has shown that a decrease in tax rates results in an increase in tax revenue.

If they were to increase taxes on anyone it should be on the bottom half of the population who pay NOTHING in taxes. These are the people that keep voting for increases in government spending without having any "skin in the game". If everyone made the connection that voting for a socialist is going to have immediate and negative effects on their income, then maybe the USA (and other countries) wouldn't be where it is today...maybe.

I believe that is absolutely false and you can't prove it, that's a right wing talking point that has always failed, look at the time when it happened under reagan and bush defecits and debt skyrocketed,now im against taxes for alot of the same reasons you are and im not pro taxes don't get me wrong but this whole idea of cutting taxes raises revenue is totally phooey,take a pay cut at work and tell me how you are going to make more money?

alot of the us problem with the us is social programs no doubt we have the same problem here, but an awful lot of the debt is caused by financing wars and trying to be the world's police force, I would like a breakdown of the costs but can't find one.

[Ianhntr]

Scary, we won't have to worry about writing any more threads about any rights I suppose. Does that mean we'll have to switch our keyboars to Mandarin? Hell, don't even know if I spelled that right!

[rugatika]

I believe that is absolutely false and you can't prove it, that's a right wing talking point that has always failed, look at the time when it happened under reagan and bush defecits and debt skyrocketed,now im against taxes for alot of the same reasons you are and im not pro taxes don't get me wrong but this whole idea of cutting taxes raises revenue is totally phooey,take a pay cut at work and tell me how you are going to make more money?

alot of the us problem with the us is social programs no doubt we have the same problem here, but an awful lot of the debt is caused by financing wars and trying to be the world's police force, I would like a breakdown of the costs but can't find one.

So are you telling me that if the government took 100% of your income you would keep working just as you always have? Or would you start working less and spend more time with your family, go fishing etc. Obviously there is some point of taxation that starts to affect people's behaviour in regards to the wealth (and taxes) they generate.

I know at the current tax rates I choose to NOT work as many hours as I could. I would rather spend my time fishing, or hunting, or with friends than give that extra money to the gov. So the gov is already losing POTENTIAL revenue from me by having a high tax rate. If the rates were lower, my income would increase as would the TOTAL taxes I pay as I choose to work more hours.


Right wing talking point, common sense, call it what you will...

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2002/12/Tax-Cuts-Increase-Federal-Revenues
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2002/12/~/media/Images/Reports/B_1544_Chart_1lg_4.ashx
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2011/0611reuss.html



Like it or not the US military is the worlds police force and I am glad it's them and not China. (maybe you feel differently...I don't know).

[Redfrog]

I believe that is absolutely false and you can't prove it, that's a right wing talking point that has always failed, look at the time when it happened under reagan and bush defecits and debt skyrocketed,now im against taxes for alot of the same reasons you are and im not pro taxes don't get me wrong but this whole idea of cutting taxes raises revenue is totally phooey,take a pay cut at work and tell me how you are going to make more money?

alot of the us problem with the us is social programs no doubt we have the same problem here, but an awful lot of the debt is caused by financing wars and trying to be the world's police force, I would like a breakdown of the costs but can't find one.



so you are saying if the gov't reduced your taxes by 50% you would take that money and put it in a sock and hide it rather than spend it. Cause if you spent it, that would mean it is possible to spend your way out of a recession. Course it depends on who does the spending.:)

[The Elkster]

Its an interesting dilemma in the US and around the world. Europe is in the same boat. If they tax more they risk what some claim about killing the reason to work and create business and innovate. On the other hand if they cut benefits to lower income people (people who spend basically all of what they bring in) that will cripple a large portion of US spending...also to the detriment of jobs and businesses. The biggest beneficery of the debt money is business whether directly or indirectly...debt contractors, medical business and all those shops that are frequented by those on social security etc. There is no way to avoid the pain.

[Garry B]

It's funded by debt, in addition to the debt that's sold to service the interest on previous debt. Debt that's paid for by the taxpayer in the end.

Profits from arms and other materiel is concentrated into the holders of a few stocks of companies which specialize in it. Wages in the few equipment factories needed to make it all are not that great, and only a small portion of the population is needed to make it. It's essentially a cute transfer of present and future wealth from the taxpayer (debt) to stockholders and executives of arms & equipment makers.

Bingo. The Military-industrial complex.

If anyone wants a short intro and example please see "War is a Racket" by retired U.S. Marine Major General Smedley D. Butler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

It is available by PDF here also:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

[pophouseman]

see this video for a look into the reasons the USA MUST be at war:

why we fight (1.5 hours)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9219858826421983682#

A great documentary with high production value, this will explain using easy to understand terms what has created the economic downturn they are having. Also shows what the future looks like economically and it is not good. Turns out the wall street fat cats knew it was all an illusion of economic prosperity and it was all based on fake investment options.

House of Cards (1hr 20 mins)

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28892719

[Samhael]

Moved all my High risk mutual Funds into a GIC on Friday,aswell sold All My Company stocks....:jawsmiley:

I increased to 40% cash a week ago, selling anything that was highly volatile.

[Samhael]

you can blame obama all you want because of your ideology that's fine but the fact is he inherited a terrible economy just going into massive recession,2 wars and alot of debt, sure he did a few things wrong im not saying he is innocent in all of this, but to blame obama and nobody else is foolish the us has been borrowing money since the end of ww2,the 2 biggest borrowers before obama are reghan and bush jr,the 2 least borrowers are carter and clinton,so it's not really a left vs right issue it's a living beyond your means issue and time has come for some major changes.

Don't forget Bush dropped the tax rate on the wealthy, hoping they would invest the tax savings in creating new jobs, however they didn't.

Bush increased the spending during a growing revenue period however why didn't he pay off debt? That's why Bush ran every company he owned or managed into bankruptcy, looks like he accelerated the USA spiral downward.

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

I believe that is absolutely false and you can't prove it, that's a right wing talking point that has always failed, look at the time when it happened under reagan and bush defecits and debt skyrocketed,now im against taxes for alot of the same reasons you are and im not pro taxes don't get me wrong but this whole idea of cutting taxes raises revenue is totally phooey,take a pay cut at work and tell me how you are going to make more money?

alot of the us problem with the us is social programs no doubt we have the same problem here, but an awful lot of the debt is caused by financing wars and trying to be the world's police force, I would like a breakdown of the costs but can't find one.


for every dollar you spend, it generates another $4.00 in sales, that is $0.50cents gov't revenue for every tax dollar left in your own pocket to spend. Are you taxed at 50%? neither am I. I'd guess I'm at 25% overall, or around 30% at the most for income. Give me back a dollar and I will generate another 20% on top of that!

if you had more of your money instead of paying it in taxes, it would generate more tax dollars in real dollars. Because you would spend it.

funny how it works, but it does

Lower Taxes Generates MORE revenue.

[rugatika]

Don't forget Bush dropped the tax rate on the wealthy, hoping they would invest the tax savings in creating new jobs, however they didn't.

Bush increased the spending during a growing revenue period however why didn't he pay off debt? That's why Bush ran every company he owned or managed into bankruptcy, looks like he accelerated the USA spiral downward.

So what you are saying if I'm reading your words correctly is that during Bush's admin, taxes were lowered (actually for everyone...not just the wealthy..with the lowest income bracket receiving a 5% reduction and the top bracket receiving a 4.6% reduction and all others a 2% reduction), revenue grew, with no change in unemployment?

Interestingly enough under Bush contrary to what you imply unemployment did decrease after his tax cuts were brought in. This despite coming off the dot com bubble bursting AND a major terrorist attack. "The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate rose from 4.2% in January 2001, peaking at 6.3% in June 2003 and reaching a trough of 4.4% in March 2007" fr http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administrati on All this after a major terrorist attack, the bursting of the dot com bubble, and fighting TWO wars abroad.

I'm no fan of George Bush, he was a little too carefree with money and gov programs for my liking, but I don't think you can accuse him of being a BAD steward of the American economy in the way Obama has.

[Samhael]

Of course he lowered the tax rates on the highest incomes the most, "More than 50 percent of the tax benefits in fact went to the wealthiest one percent -- for capital gains and dividends, a lower maximum income tax rate, accelerated depreciation for companies, and the like." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harlan-green/the-destruction-of-our-we_b_914467.html

Increase the tax rate on the wealthy, on the higher incomes, generating more revenue. Increase the taxes on estates, remove the 5/10 million exemption.

We (USA/Canada) lowered taxes on corporations, to create jobs, but what it did was increase the cash position of the corps, that and higher profits. And I understand and agree why, companies dont want to spend the money until they are confident in the direction of the economy. Companies are buying back stock, paying off debt, not creating jobs. Smart thing to do.


Anyway I enjoyed this thread, will continue to read but no longer responding.

:sHa_shakeshout:

I hope the USA create manufacturing jobs, finds a way to correct things, create an economy with a growing middle class, redistributes the wealth, ahhh nirvana. :bad_boys_20:

[Cdamen]

I can see alot of civil unrest in the USA cards ATM....

[eastcoast]

So are you telling me that if the government took 100% of your income you would keep working just as you always have? Or would you start working less and spend more time with your family, go fishing etc. Obviously there is some point of taxation that starts to affect people's behaviour in regards to the wealth (and taxes) they generate.

I know at the current tax rates I choose to NOT work as many hours as I could. I would rather spend my time fishing, or hunting, or with friends than give that extra money to the gov. So the gov is already losing POTENTIAL revenue from me by having a high tax rate. If the rates were lower, my income would increase as would the TOTAL taxes I pay as I choose to work more hours.


Right wing talking point, common sense, call it what you will...

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2002/12/Tax-Cuts-Increase-Federal-Revenues
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2002/12/~/media/Images/Reports/B_1544_Chart_1lg_4.ashx
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2011/0611reuss.html



Like it or not the US military is the worlds police force and I am glad it's them and not China. (maybe you feel differently...I don't know).

obviously there has to be some kind of balance in taxes, tax cuts never financed new schools,built new roads,hired more cops or teachers etc, but if we are taxed too high people will do what you do and cut back to pay less,what the perfect balance is I don't think nobody knows but going into a major debt crisis a temporary tax increase and major spening cuts are the only way out.the rich save their money that's why they are rich, the poor spend more hence they are poor,so giving a tax cut to the rich will do less for the economy than a tax cut on the poor.

[rugatika]

obviously there has to be some kind of balance in taxes, tax cuts never financed new schools,built new roads,hired more cops or teachers etc, but if we are taxed too high people will do what you do and cut back to pay less,what the perfect balance is I don't think nobody knows but going into a major debt crisis a temporary tax increase and major spening cuts are the only way out.the rich save their money that's why they are rich, the poor spend more hence they are poor,so giving a tax cut to the rich will do less for the economy than a tax cut on the poor.

Funny. Whenever Libs want to increase taxes they whine about roads not getting paved, police not protecting people, children not getting schools and teachers, fireman not putting out fires etc etc etc. Curious how they never mention that the people might lose programs like these: http://dirtyspendingsecrets.com/ That's right...when the American government can afford to spend 2.5 million teaching Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job, damn right there's room to cut taxes and TOO much money is being TAKEN from taxpayers to fund stupid government programs. These stupid things go on all over the place. I just heard Vancouver is going to start buying clean crack pipes for their druggies now. What a joke.

And just what do you think the rich do with the money they are "saving". Put it in a freaking sock under their mattress?? That's money that is either used by banks to lend other people, or to invest in stocks to fund other companies starting up or expanding, or to buy bonds that help fund government. Jeez.

I'm not rich myself...but I am constantly amazed at how ignorant some people become when they want to demonize these people and pick their pockets. They already pay way more than their fair share of taxes, they are typically business owners that provide jobs to families. They are innovators, and inventors, and hard working people that through dedication and discipline have achieved something that most of us only dream of. And when they do achieve it, what do we do? Do we hold them up as people to be emulated? No, they are people that took more than their fair share, they need to be pilloried and have their incomes plundered. Sick.

The only way out is to quit spending money. Simple. The USA does not have an income problem...it has a spending problem...just like most governments in the world do. Funny how easy it is to spend money to get votes when it's not your own money.

Sorry for the Rant.

[eastcoast]

Funny. Whenever Libs want to increase taxes they whine about roads not getting paved, police not protecting people, children not getting schools and teachers, fireman not putting out fires etc etc etc. Curious how they never mention that the people might lose programs like these: http://dirtyspendingsecrets.com/ That's right...when the American government can afford to spend 2.5 million teaching Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job, damn right there's room to cut taxes and TOO much money is being TAKEN from taxpayers to fund stupid government programs. These stupid things go on all over the place. I just heard Vancouver is going to start buying clean crack pipes for their druggies now. What a joke.

And just what do you think the rich do with the money they are "saving". Put it in a freaking sock under their mattress?? That's money that is either used by banks to lend other people, or to invest in stocks to fund other companies starting up or expanding, or to buy bonds that help fund government. Jeez.

I'm not rich myself...but I am constantly amazed at how ignorant some people become when they want to demonize these people and pick their pockets. They already pay way more than their fair share of taxes, they are typically business owners that provide jobs to families. They are innovators, and inventors, and hard working people that through dedication and discipline have achieved something that most of us only dream of. And when they do achieve it, what do we do? Do we hold them up as people to be emulated? No, they are people that took more than their fair share, they need to be pilloried and have their incomes plundered. Sick.

The only way out is to quit spending money. Simple. The USA does not have an income problem...it has a spending problem...just like most governments in the world do. Funny how easy it is to spend money to get votes when it's not your own money.

Sorry for the Rant.

what makes you think im for stupid spending?because I want more of my money to go to hiring trachers and cops I am for spending money on needles? I don't get the link it's more hyperbole from you, I don't like taxes you don't like taxes nobody likes taxes and I would like to pay as little as possible just like everybody else,but if nobody's paying them nothing gets done, road,bridges,schools,firehalls etc are all paid for by taxes and we as a socitey need them, im not for extravagent spending as you think,I am for minimalist spending on essential services, have you not read about my opinions of the arena the lrt or the muttart etc?

I would like to see a flat tax myself instead of taxing income we could have a 7-10% tax on everything and eliminate the income tax all together, there have been to many loopholes created and it's too confusing,tax goods and services that way you make more you spend more you pay more taxes,if you want to spend less then you pay less taxes, the money will be spent sometime by somebody and it would be fair to everybody, plus drug dealers,prostitutes etc will all start paying taxes aswell instead of their money being underground and non taxable.

as far as spending money goes of course it's easy to spend more than you take in to buy votes, the majority of people don't pay attention and don't care about that,the government of the day promises something with future debt and the people are all for it, I would like to see our debt cleared in 10 years and new laws saying we can only have so much debt and only short term debt, I would like to see laws that and surplus has to be paid directly to the debt,this isn't a right vs left issue because as anybody can see the right as just as bad as the left on economics,look ath the mess alberta is in right now with a defecit,the streets should be paved in gold here but we have a defecit? we have had 40 years of conservative governments and they can't control their spending that is not the left's fault.

[rugatika]

point being there is lots of room to cut spending without affecting vital services that all people generally agree our taxes should go to (fire, police, defence, schools, roads etc) WITHOUT increasing taxes on anyone. Not too long ago this country ran without any income taxes at all.

AND...I think the argument could easily be made that despite the name...Albertans have not had 40 years of conservative government. More like 40 years of liberal government blessed with huge resource income if you ask me.

Oh...and I agree with you on a flat tax that is charged on sales. Expand the GST and scrap the income tax.

[Okotokian]

So what you are saying if I'm reading your words correctly is that during Bush's admin, taxes were lowered (actually for everyone...not just the wealthy..with the lowest income bracket receiving a 5% reduction and the top bracket receiving a 4.6% reduction and all others a 2% reduction),

I'm sure not in favour of higher taxes, and I do think the rich generally "pay their share" (much more than their share in most cases). But Bush should have actually raised taxes to pay for the wars. In every past war people were urged to sacrifice and did so. It seems that nowaday's the average citizen's sum total contribution to the war effort is putting a "Support our troops" sticker on their car. But god, actually pay some taxes to support those troops? "No way, just borrow the money and let my kids and grandkids pay for it."

[eastcoast]

I'm sure not in favour of higher taxes, and I do think the rich generally "pay their share" (much more than their share in most cases). But Bush should have actually raised taxes to pay for the wars. In every past war people were urged to sacrifice and did so. It seems that nowaday's the average citizen's sum total contribution to the war effort is putting a "Support our troops" sticker on their car. But god, actually pay some taxes to support those troops? "No way, just borrow the money and let my kids and grandkids pay for it."

there is a disconnect for sure between what we get and what we pay, politicans use our money to buy us off, and enough dumb people buy it to vote them in, look at mandel he has been the biggest tax and spend mayor of edmonton ever but he keeps getting in over and over again, because unfortunately people who don't directly pay property tax overwhelmingly support him (ie renters), whenever a politican says they want to improve things be very afraid.

[eastcoast]

point being there is lots of room to cut spending without affecting vital services that all people generally agree our taxes should go to (fire, police, defence, schools, roads etc) WITHOUT increasing taxes on anyone. Not too long ago this country ran without any income taxes at all.

AND...I think the argument could easily be made that despite the name...Albertans have not had 40 years of conservative government. More like 40 years of liberal government blessed with huge resource income if you ask me.

Oh...and I agree with you on a flat tax that is charged on sales. Expand the GST and scrap the income tax.

unfortunately we will never be able to run on no tax ever again,as the country expands and more people come here and roads are built we have to pay for them, I am like you I don't mind paying for cops or firefighters or teachers or army guys no problem at all, I have problems subsidizing unsustainable business models like public transport,museums,art galleries and arena's, that which can not stand on it's own shouldn't expect the government to pay forever for the good of a few, I wouldn't even have a problem with the taxes staying the same but more going toward essential services and less toward silly things.

the alberta government hs switched between left and right over the last 40 years,lougheed at first was right,then went kinda left then back right,getty was mostly left,klein was hard right to begin with up til probably 2000 then started veering left,and stelmach has been pretty left right along.

[Sundancefisher]

US Population

311,901,144

Total Debt

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

About $14,564,830,000,000 as of now

Each American man/woman/child owes $46,000 in national debt ...or $132,000 per tax payer...plus $52,000 in personal debt.

Each citizen owes $12,000 in yearly interest costs.

Remember when Albertans screamed as the belt tightening started... We are better off today for it.

Still when you look at the US tax rates...they don't seem that far off from Canada's. http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm


Unfortunately I can not see the US politicians having the guts or mandate to do what they need to do. The Americans want the same standard of living and social safety net as Canadians yet they want to do it without paying higher taxes. They basically want it for free...which is why the debt has always gone up...even in the boom years. Too much GDP goes towards making money off the health of the average family which cripples their financial health. Watching US TV is made up of Drug ads, Lawyer sueing drug company ads, Healthcare insurance ads, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

This is going to be a very interesting next 2 years for political watchers.

They need to significantly scale back their defence spending.

IMHO

Sun

[Sundancefisher]

I believe that is absolutely false and you can't prove it, that's a right wing talking point that has always failed, look at the time when it happened under reagan and bush defecits and debt skyrocketed,now im against taxes for alot of the same reasons you are and im not pro taxes don't get me wrong but this whole idea of cutting taxes raises revenue is totally phooey,take a pay cut at work and tell me how you are going to make more money?

alot of the us problem with the us is social programs no doubt we have the same problem here, but an awful lot of the debt is caused by financing wars and trying to be the world's police force, I would like a breakdown of the costs but can't find one.

Depends if you are talking decreasing personal taxes or corporate taxes. There is a direct link to profit and hiring. Jobs create personal taxes.

Prime example is in Alberta. Decreasing profits in the oil patch decreases jobs. Decreased jobs in turn slashes personal tax revenue.

It is a vicious cycle that the Stelmach messed up royally on.

I think the money gets wasted in the size of the government...they need to stream line almost as much as the City of Calgary.

[Deer Hunter]

The USA isnt alone with large amounts of national debt but they definately have the most hyper sensitive sky is falling media. Once again a bad story is pitched as being the end of the world... Life will go on.

[Garry B]

Checking back in.

Firstly - regarding the stock market, the people here who cashed out days ago and said so are looking pretty right. Respect. :happy0180:

Secondly - today marks the longest daily losing streak in the markets for three years. Today the S&P 500 made a new low after making a lower high. That's bearish.

Thirdly - anyone here who looks at charts will see what appears to be a head and shoulders top in the S&P 500. And price broke the neck line today. If that plays out the way they are supposed to we will see the market decline a lot. :sign0068: (Patterns are not infallible though.)

http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n554/garryb_9/justpics/20110802_-_Possible_Head_And_Shoulders_Pattern.png

So, what does this say about their economy? I'm not sure. The stock market is about stocks. It's not the economy market.

Today was panic. Yesterday was panic. People are panicking to get out of the market and now the market is BADLY oversold on an intra-day, daily and weekly basis. Personally I don't like to sell oversold markets. Who knows though, it could keep diving.

Again, respect to the bears from a few days ago.

[Sneeze]

Its easy to throw in your 2 cents when you can put it on your visa.


Amerika's problems will cross the 49th in time. Debt is a drug sold to American's and Canadians alike so the dealers can get rich while we slowly overdose.

[alpineman]

Interesting read I received today from someone.

"Look, I don't drink, and I don't smoke. I go to bed early. In general, I'm about as straight-and-narrow as it gets,"

"But on Sunday, no matter what I did, I couldn't help but break the rules.

"There were just too many rules, that was the problem. I'd stumble on one rule, only to trip over another. I wondered if I was really in the United States of America...

"I'll share one tiny example with you from my weekend... And then I'll share the simple secret to building fantastic prosperity in a country like ours. (It really is incredibly simple.)

"Let's get started...

"'Daddy, can you throw me, like you do in the pool?' my non-daredevil, 8-year-old daughter asked. 'Sure,' I said. And I did. But the pimply faced Lake Lure lifeguard went nuts...

"Apparently, this is against the rules at the public beach here in Lake Lure, North Carolina. We were in chest-deep water, with a sand bottom that goes out for 50 yards. Nothing bad could happen.

"A minute or two passed. 'Daddy, can I climb on your back?'

"'Sure,' I said. And she did. Uh oh! The pimply lifeguard went nuts again.

"Apparently, little daughters on dads' backs are against the Lake Lure rules, too. I was surprised. There was no chance something could go wrong.

"She decided to get out of the water and go down the waterslide.

"Remember...she's no daredevil. Fortunately for her, this slide had no danger, other than the chance of a little water up your nose at the end. I started to walk into the water, to encourage her as she came off the slide for the first time.

"The lifeguards waved me off. 'You can't be out here with us,' they said. Well, OK then. I watched from the other side of the fence. We left soon after.

"Lake Lure charged our family a US$50 entry fee to use this public beach. My US$50 paid for those lifeguards to uphold Lake Lure's rules, it paid their bosses' salaries, and it paid whoever else sits around making up the rules.

"I remember traveling to Iceland a few years ago. I loved the freedom at public places...

"Look up 'Geysir Iceland' on Google Images. You'll see people standing inches away from deathly hot water shooting straight out of the earth. No Lake Lure lifeguards there. Look up Gulfoss, an incredible waterfall. You can walk the rocks at Gulfoss, right to your death if you so choose. No guardrails or Lake Lure lifeguards there, either.

"There you have legitimate danger. You would die if you were foolish enough to go a couple feet too far. Though there are some fools out there, Icelanders give the rest of us the benefit of the doubt.

"People need to be free to soar and free to fall on their faces. Falling down occasionally and getting back up again is part of being human.

"It just so happens that what is true for one man is true for all men, as Sir John Cowperthwaite of Scotland discovered.

"A half-century ago, the United Kingdom put Sir John in charge of Hong Kong. He found Hong Kong did well without government help. Legend has it, he even refused to collect economic statistics for fear the Brits would use them to determine what part of Hong Kong's society to 'help.'

"Hong Kong went from 'a barren rock' to wealthier than Britain (per capita) by 1992.

"Sir John's secret? Do nothing.

"He spent a good portion of his time preventing British political busybodies from meddling in Hong Kong. He kept rules and regulations to a minimum. Your actions had potential rewards and potential consequences, as it should be.

"Tax rates in Hong Kong are among the lowest in the world. (The top rate is 15% on businesses and 16.5% on individuals, I believe.) There's hardly any social safety net by Western standards. But you know what? The unemployment rate is almost always low. It's currently 3.5%.

"Lake Lure has chosen the opposite path of Hong Kong. It's set up tons of rules. It's protecting people from themselves. And then it pays government people to enforce all the rules. How's that working out? North Carolina has a state income tax of more than 7% (beyond federal income taxes). The unemployment rate in Lake Lure is 16.6% (the most recent figure I could find).

"North Carolina could learn a thing or two from Sir John Cowperthwaite.

"Sir John knew fewer rules and less government intervention leads to fantastic prosperity over time. He learned it's incredibly difficult to maintain DOING NOTHING politically, keeping your hands off. But he proved it works.

"Not only could North Carolina learn a thing or two from Sir John Cowperthwaite, but so could nearly all our politicians in Washington.

"While I will enjoy our time in North Carolina, I look forward to getting back in the ocean at home...to tossing my daughter and having her climb on my back...at no charge...with no Lake Lure lifeguards telling me what I can and cannot do."

[winged1]

Checking back in.

Firstly - regarding the stock market, the people here who cashed out days ago and said so are looking pretty right. Respect. :happy0180:

Secondly - today marks the longest daily losing streak in the markets for three years. Today the S&P 500 made a new low after making a lower high. That's bearish.

Thirdly - anyone here who looks at charts will see what appears to be a head and shoulders top in the S&P 500. And price broke the neck line today. If that plays out the way they are supposed to we will see the market decline a lot. :sign0068: (Patterns are not infallible though.)

http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n554/garryb_9/justpics/20110802_-_Possible_Head_And_Shoulders_Pattern.png

So, what does this say about their economy? I'm not sure. The stock market is about stocks. It's not the economy market.

Today was panic. Yesterday was panic. People are panicking to get out of the market and now the market is BADLY oversold on an intra-day, daily and weekly basis. Personally I don't like to sell oversold markets. Who knows though, it could keep diving.

Again, respect to the bears from a few days ago.

I'm thinking there are some pretty good deals right now.

[rugatika]

US credit rating downgraded from triple A to AAplus...First time EVER!!

White House claims Standard and Poors using wrong math....lmao.