If you have a business, you didn't build that

[Franco]

[QUOTE=mjh345;991899]Touche!!

If there is one thing the govt has proven it is that they aren't the solution; they are the problem!!

The problem we have is that both parties in our 2 party system give lip service to the fact that spending needs to be cut and the size of govt reduced.
They both promise balanced budgets and state that if we will vote for them they will deliver. However with the exception for the last 2 yrs of Clintons time in office they have all failed to balance budgets & universally have failed to reduce the size of govt. Hell recently they have even failed to come up with a budget!!

The solution I see is that we the people are going to have to kick these two self serving lying parties to the curb and pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. These imbeciles routinely raise the "DEBT CEILING" on their supposed attempt at fiscal responsibility on an annual or semi-annual basis. Yet we voters remain complicit in allowing these imbeciles to remain in office.
Congress has an approval rating in the single digits; however the percentage of incumbents who run for reelection remain high. Everybody wants to kick the bastards out, but in practice they want every other congressman thrown out. However they like the Congresscritter they have the ability to vote out, and return them to office where they are free to screw us for another term. Undoubtedly they like their Congresscritter based on the fact that he gets money spent on their district, which he no doubt uses his franking priviledge to keep him well aware of.
This results in a system where spending is the lifeblood of the Congresscritters exixstence. That is why we have to have a balanced budget amendment in order to force Congress to live within their (OUR) means and get rid of the deficit spending Santa Claus mentality which gets them reelected[/QUOTE]

The people aren't demanding it because most of the electorate doesn't know any better. Why should Congress do any different when they are allowed to continue doing the same thing, over and over. There is little hope with the Dems and Repubs and it will take a complete financial meltdown before we will see any real change.

Dear Barry and Mitt,

Want my vote?

Then tell me how you will end the Nanny State, the War On Drugs, get the Fed Reserve under control and either abolished or at the very least, audited? How will you put an end to all the useless agencies and departments, drastically reduce the size of the Fed payroll and pass a Balanced Budget Amendment? Put an end to our Foreign Intervention and place that money in real Defense? End Lobbyist and other special interest and place the interest of the citizens first.

Signed,

A Voter

[Buzz]

If the government cuts spending to the extent that you two seem to want right now, the current depression we are in will look like a boom economy.

Maybe what we need is for the Paul Ryan types to completely take over the government because I believe that giving them enough rope will put their ideas permanently where they belong, in the dustbin of history.

[Buzz]

Buzz, I believe that you misunderstood what Gerry was saying here:

3) His statement carries the implication that ANYone (just as smart, just as hard-working) could do this. But only some do. The ones who do ARE different than those who DO NOT. They should be role models, not pillaged.

So, you don't believe that in America anyone can make it? I'm sorry... So, in your opinion, if they are "just as smart, just as hard working" then what is it that they lack? Yes, they should be role models, but the example they are setting is, country be damned, it's all about me me me.

Gerry was not himself saying that all are as smart and hardworking, he was paraphrasing part of Obama's statement. This perhaps explains to some extent why you also appear to be unable to correctly interpret what Obama said.


As to the Luke quote: I have always liked liked that verse, but had never really noticed that it uses the word "GIVEN" rather than the word "EARNED". In that quote Luke also seems to be downplaying the importance of individual initiative. There are those who believe that any accomplishment is a "Gift" from God, but even then, it's not a gift from the Government.

I don't think I misunderstood her comment. Maybe she can come on here and let me know one way or the other. The only ingredient I can think of that one person "just as smart and just as hard working" might be missing is an appetite for taking risk, or the self confidence to believe that giving an idea a shot is without risk.

[Illinois Bob]

If the President ran Bo in hunt tests or trials he would tell all the other dog owners,handlers,and trainers that they didn't get their ribbons on their own. All of the judges,hunt test workers,bird boys,trainers,and anybody that helped along the way did it all for you. You didn't do it. Lots of people train as hard as you do. While the help along the way part is true for most of us,I think the president would want all of the ribbons and titles evenly distributed among all of the dogs no matter how they do.

FC AFC HRCH BO MH (If the president has his way)

[road kill]

If the President ran Bo in hunt tests or trials he would tell all the other dog owners,handlers,and trainers that they didn't get their ribbons on their own. All of the judges,hunt test workers,bird boys,trainers,and anybody that helped along the way did it all for you. You didn't do it. While the help along the way part is true for many of us,I think the president would want all of the ribbons and titles evenly distributed among all of the dogs no matter how they do.

FC AFC HRCH BO MH (He's entitled to the titles)

Amazingly, Obama got Bin Laden all by himself!!!!!

[Buzz]

Thank God for the comedians...


Daily Show: Back in Black - Campaign Fibs the Obama and Romney campaigns produce bulls**t at the same rate as actual bulls.

[Franco]

If the government cuts spending to the extent that you two seem to want right now, the current depression we are in will look like a boom economy.

Maybe what we need is for the Paul Ryan types to completely take over the government because I believe that giving them enough rope will put their ideas permanently where they belong, in the dustbin of history.

It willl be a much bigger disaster to continue with the current level of spending than to feel some pain now and fix the situation at the core. How much longer can we continue with our present deficit spending? Look at what is happening in Europe. We don't need to mirror their policies with more fiat money and borrowing. If the current Dems or Repubs raise taxes, they will just spend more. That has always been their pattern. We need real reform and I understand that is NOT what Americans want given the two candidates we have to choose from. Yes, we have the government we deserve because the American voter has continued to support our two inept parties. Nothing substanial will change even if Rmoney were to win the election. That is exactly why we need to put the breaks on now, before our politicians dig a hole too deep to get out of! So, since neither party is willing to fix our core problems, then the only thing to do is to stand behind Grover Norquist and forbid Congress from increasing taxes and further burdening those that are productive.

[mjh345]

If the government cuts spending to the extent that you two seem to want right now, the current depression we are in will look like a boom economy.

Maybe what we need is for the Paul Ryan types to completely take over the government because I believe that giving them enough rope will put their ideas permanently where they belong, in the dustbin of history.

Buzz, unlike most on here I generally listen to and respect what you say and post with an open mind. Unlike most on here I also frequently agree with you
I'm assuming I am one of the "two" spending cutters you are referring to in your quote.

Before going to Law School, my undergrad degrees were in Finance and Economics. Admittedly that was a long time ago, however I still kinda Academically have the tools tounderstand and accept the theory's behind the modeling that calls for increased govt spending to stimulate an economy in a depression.

However you can have all of the Academic modeling you want, but eventually you have to acknowledge reality.
The academic modelling doesn't account for the reality of influence peddling that is so predominant in our corrupt political system. The models assume that the influx of govt spending will result in reinvestment and a certain exponential multiplier and ripple effect that will have on the overall economy.

The academic models dont assume lobbyists influence that will allow for the financial system to be given 100's of billions of $'s to do with it as they please.

The models would have anticipated that the financial system would have taken those funds and reinvested them by making loans to businessmen who in turn would have hired more people resulting in more payroll & goods and services & allowing your multiplier effect thus benefitting the economy as a whole.
The models don't anticipate the banks sitting on this money, or loaning it to Europe, reinvesting in T-bills, paying bonuses to their execs etc.


As far as the govt spending that was to go for "Shovel ready" infrastructure reconstruction, your academic models presume most of that money to go to rebuild roads, bridges, sewers etc that will have an immediate and long lasting effect on the creation of payroll and selling of goods and services.
Most models I would assume wouldn't allow for the political cronyism that resulted in boondoggles like Solyndra and other fiascos that have been in the news that created very little economic impact for the economy as a whole

Because of the cronyism and corruption that is rife in our political system we will never know if the Academic models are correct. Because of my academic background I suspect that they may be.................


Eventually you have to use some common sense!!

Common sense would tell you that after Bush tried a couple of stimulus packages and after Obama has tried a few stimulus packages and after QE1, QE2, etc and the fed allowing the banks to have free money at the discount window for years that IT AINT WORKIN!!!!

Common sense would tell you that during the boom years we should have been retiring debt and saving for a rainy day so that when a depression hits the govt can increase spending by using what they have set aside; kinda like they tell us to do

Common sense would tell you that when the world is up in arms because of the debt crisis in Greece and Spain, and that our debt as a % of GDP is worse than Spains that maybe it is time to back off of the deficit spending

Common sense would tell you that because of cronyism, crookedness and general inefficiencies that the GOVT AINT THE ANSWER........THE GOVT IS THE PROBLEM!!!!!

I could go on for pages about what common sense would say but if you aint got my drift by now you aint gonna

.

[huntinman]

Buzz, unlike most on here I generally listen to and respect what you say and post with an open mind. Unlike most on here I also frequently agree with you
I'm assuming I am one of the "two" spending cutters you are referring to in your quote.

Before going to Law School, my undergrad degrees were in Finance and Economics. Admittedly that was a long time ago, however I still kinda Academically have the tools tounderstand and accept the theory's behind the modeling that calls for increased govt spending to stimulate an economy in a depression.

However you can have all of the Academic modeling you want, but eventually you have to acknowledge reality.
The academic modelling doesn't account for the reality of influence peddling that is so predominant in our corrupt political system. The models assume that the influx of govt spending will result in reinvestment and a certain exponential multiplier and ripple effect that will have on the overall economy.

The academic models dont assume lobbyists influence that will allow for the financial system to be given 100's of billions of $'s to do with it as they please.

The models would have anticipated that the financial system would have taken those funds and reinvested them by making loans to businessmen who in turn would have hired more people resulting in more payroll & goods and services & allowing your multiplier effect thus benefitting the economy as a whole.
The models don't anticipate the banks sitting on this money, or loaning it to Europe, reinvesting in T-bills, paying bonuses to their execs etc.


As far as the govt spending that was to go for "Shovel ready" infrastructure reconstruction, your academic models presume most of that money to go to rebuild roads, bridges, sewers etc that will have an immediate and long lasting effect on the creation of payroll and selling of goods and services.
Most models I would assume wouldn't allow for the political cronyism that resulted in boondoggles like Solyndra and other fiascos that have been in the news that created very little economic impact for the economy as a whole

Because of the cronyism and corruption that is rife in our political system we will never know if the Academic models are correct. Because of my academic background I suspect that they may be.................


Eventually you have to use some common sense!!

Common sense would tell you that after Bush tried a couple of stimulus packages and after Obama has tried a few stimulus packages and after QE1, QE2, etc and the fed allowing the banks to have free money at the discount window for years that IT AINT WORKIN!!!!

Common sense would tell you that during the boom years we should have been retiring debt and saving for a rainy day so that when a depression hits the govt can increase spending by using what they have set aside; kinda like they tell us to do

Common sense would tell you that when the world is up in arms because of the debt crisis in Greece and Spain, and that our debt as a % of GDP is worse than Spains that maybe it is time to back off of the deficit spending

Common sense would tell you that because of cronyism, crookedness and general inefficiencies that the GOVT AINT THE ANSWER........THE GOVT IS THE PROBLEM!!!!!

I could go on for pages about what common sense would say but if you aint got my drift by now you aint gonna

.

Common sense is not so common...

[Gerry Clinchy]

Originally Posted by HPL
Buzz, I believe that you misunderstood what Gerry was saying here:

3) His statement carries the implication that ANYone (just as smart, just as hard-working) could do this. But only some do. The ones who do ARE different than those who DO NOT. They should be role models, not pillaged.

So, you don't believe that in America anyone can make it? I'm sorry... So, in your opinion, if they are "just as smart, just as hard working" then what is it that they lack? Yes, they should be role models, but the example they are setting is, country be damned, it's all about me me me.

Gerry was not himself saying that all are as smart and hardworking, he was paraphrasing part of Obama's statement. This perhaps explains to some extent why you also appear to be unable to correctly interpret what Obama said.


As to the Luke quote: I have always liked liked that verse, but had never really noticed that it uses the word "GIVEN" rather than the word "EARNED". In that quote Luke also seems to be downplaying the importance of individual initiative. There are those who believe that any accomplishment is a "Gift" from God, but even then, it's not a gift from the Government.





then Buzz

I don't think I misunderstood her comment. Maybe she can come on here and let me know one way or the other. The only ingredient I can think of that one person "just as smart and just as hard working" might be missing is an appetite for taking risk, or the self confidence to believe that giving an idea a shot is without risk.

Buzz, I believe you read my thought correctly, that there is some additional ingredient, other than just being smart & hardworking, that makes some very successful, and others not.

Obama's statement ignores the other ingredients. After infrastructure, after smart, after hard work ... there is more. Motivation, ambition, working harder than the other guy, perseverence in adversity, deferred gratification ...

I don't think that all successful people are of the opinion "the country be damned". Many, many successful people give back a lot ... not just in taxes ... but in voluntary charitable donations.