Reply With Quote
my point is list your cuts, duh.
right wingers love cuts, but when it comes time to cut, they don't want any cuts that affect them.
White House elevator operator making 200K
my point is list your cuts, duh.
right wingers love cuts, but when it comes time to cut, they don't want any cuts that affect them.
Quit generalizing you lazy . I gave a small list for starters all of which would be substantial
you lazy , how much off the DoD annual budget of about $700B?
according to your bubba poster above, we need to cut $1.6T to balance. So where do you cut $1.6T?? come on, man/girl up, or STFU
Federal employee pensions
What's your bright idea? Keep doing what were doing? Wake up
1) Remove deductions and ins ute a flat tax system where everyone pays into it and having money doesn't allow you to skirt paying, but making sure everyone has to pay into it so it isn't politicians promising to deliver services/goods to you while others pay for it. Everyone has skin in the game, no one gets out of paying due to fancy legal tricks or having their vote bought.
2) Remove ability for politicians to participate in sponsored events/junkets. No need to go to Jamaica to meet with/get educated by a company/group. That's why taxpayers provide you with an office. Many companies don't allow employees to receive gifts from vendors due to the conflicts of interest that can arise.
3) Term limits. Don't think elaboration needed there
4) Public financing for candidates. Focus on issues not on fundraising during campaigning
5) Insider knowledge applies to everyone - politicians included. No special rules for trading.
6) There is no misspeaking - there are lies. Being caught is an ethics violation. Welcome to morals clause in all of your contracts with the USA. See ya for violations.
7) Must spend in accordance to what we bring in. Some leeway must be here I recognize that, but can't keep punting tough cuts down the road for someone else to deal with.
8) No borrowing against other programs (SSI, etc). Those programs are there with a promise to pay in and get something out a later date.
DoK lumped the early half of Xers in with the boomers and I can see why by your example. Complete lack of accountability.
You are supporting the notion here and undoubtedly support the candidates that push this . I know you supported Ryan last election just as you are here.
Who Should Young People Throw Under the Bus: Granny or Billionaire Hedgie Stan Druckenmiller?
I pointedly avoid New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman; you can glean everything you need to know about him from the official Thomas Friedman Op/Ed Generator or some of Matt Taibbi’s lambastings (see here, here, and here for examples).
So without attempting to wade too deeply into the goo of Friedman’s latest column, let’s limit ourselves to the the fact that Friedman is running PR for former Soros Fund Management lead investor Stan Druckenmiller. The column also serves to illustrate how Serious People like Friedman were ready to jump on the deficit cutting bandwagon once the shutdown/debt ceiling drama was put to rest for a bit.
Druckemiller’s latest cause is to foment generational warfare. He’s going to college campuses and telling students that things suck (which they know full well) and they need to go after Boomers who are gonna get too much in en lements if things don’t change. Now from what I can infer, the presentation is sophisticated, since Druckenmiller throws other big Federal spending items into the mix, like defense. But the fact that he depicts tax rates as a problem is a major tell.
Curiously, for someone who says he’s a friend of Druckenmiller, Friedman is remarkably cir spect about Druckemniller’s political history. Druckemniller has not only been one of two or three biggest Republican donors for the better part of two decades, he’s been firmly aligned with the aggressive “shrink government/cut taxes” effort, back to being a strong ally of Newt Gingrich. For Druckemmiller to point at Boomers and act as if he’s part of the solution, as opposed to one of the long-standing proponents of tax cuts, which among other things were one of the big causes in the rise in government debt levels under George Bush, is remarkably disingenuous.
Back to the current post. So why are the young people Druckeniller trying to incite against their elders in such terrible shape? There’s an immediate factor and a longer-term trend. The immediate one is the aftermath of the global financial crisis, which has produced disastrously high levels of unemployment for the young, particularly college graduates. And Druckemmiller doesn’t bear some vague general guilt as a member of the financial services industry that emerged more powerful as a result of this event; he actually bears considerably more responsibility than most by having taken out huge bets against subprime that drove demand to the worst sort of mortgages and had way too many fragile, levered, critically positioned financial ins utions on the wrong side of the trade. For instance, on of the parties on the other side of Druckenmiller-style bets were monolines. When they went seen as being at risk, the auction rate securities market froze because monolines were also guarantors of municipal bonds, and everyone knew this short-term muni paper would fall in value as the monolines were downgraded. The result was that interest rates jumped to the parties that had issued this paper, helping to wreck the budgets of cities and transit authorities. That’s only one example of the many sorts of collateral damage that resulted from the remarkably lucrative subprime short bet.
And if you widen the frame, this country has been through a protracted and successful campaign to revise the social contract to favor capital over labor. You can see its success in the accelerating rise in income inequality, the lack of economic mobility, and the huge corporate profit share. Warren Buffet claimed that a level of over 6% of GDP wasn’t sustainable; depending on how you measure it, it’s currently at over 10%, some peg it as high as 12%.
That rise in corporate profit share has come at the expense of employment and wage growth. The policy shift started under Carter, but the old model of having companies share the benefit of productivity gains and basing overall prosperity on wage growth was abandoned in the Reagan/Thatcher era for one that favored asset price growth and used rising levels of consumer leverage to mask stagnant wages. Druckenmiller was a huge backer of the politicians that promoted those programs. Yet he has the temerity to try to turn young people against ordinary folks in their 50s and 60s, most of which who never had any political influence, when he was a major sponsor of the very policies that have helped impoverish American youth. Perhaps Druckenmiller is making such an aggressive and public disinformation tour because he knows that if young people were to turn on the old, he’d be one of the most deserving targets for their vengeance.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/...oxYHA1uhOud.99
Like Peterson's the Fix The Debt scam, the Boomers-screwed-the-young project is also propaganda and LIES by the 1%.
lol household budget analogies... smh
They always ignore the idea of introducing more money in into the household which in this analogy would be taxes
How does issuing some more money enters the household analogy, tbh?
new revenue stream, daddy gets a 2nd job. Cutting not enough, you have no choice to bring money in another way
But it isn't new income, it's new currency. It's more like "daddy gets a photocopier" and a pass from the Secret Service...
How is raising taxes new currency? Instead of a guy paying $5 to the gov. he pays $6 Same currency but taxpayer has less. The gov has an extra dollar in it's account.
But the fed gov doesn't need to do that. The fed government can just issue more money. They're actually the only ones that can do that. Which is why you would never confuse the fed government with a household.
As a matter of fact, the debt-ceiling is exactly that: how much more can the fed expand the monetary base.
And? YOUR generation is the one in power along WITH the boomers. Are you trying to say that my generation - with lower population numbers and less money - have more influence than your generation then you're out of your ing mind. If you want to say we've had more time to fix the problem then you're even worse at math than I already think you are. If you want to say my generation has more representation in elected office than your generation does then you're still a ing moron.
So tell me, exactly how is it my generation's fault, Darrin?
Seriously - outside of some serious delusion - how the can anyone put this country's problems on MY generation. Would love the explanation here. When have we had more voting power than older age groups? When have we had more money or more representation?
Your generation is the one being robbed. Who's blaming your generation for the problem?
Your generation needs a movement that is much more organized and much less misguided than OWS.
obviously it's not meant to be taken literally, tbh
yeah but how much more are you going to tax? not even the most extravagant taxes would make up for our freakishly large annual deficit
check this out. its a couple of years old, but i bookmarked it
http://therightscoop.com/awesome-mar...e-perspective/
printing currency to pay off debt kills the value of the dollar, which s over people like you and i that use dollars, tbh. it also makes the US much less credible as a borrower and will probably get the country's credit rating even lower. especially when you consider how astronomical the debt is.
thats what zimbambwe did a couple of years back. they were in debt to the world bank/imf and other countries and they just printed so much that their currency essentially died and lost all value. not saying that would happen to the dollar, but its the principle, el
heck, nothing is stopping the treasury from printing a bunch of 1 trillion dollar bills. its within their power and they could pay of our debts overnight! why don't they, tbh?
Last edited by spurraider21; 10-19-2013 at 03:00 AM.
instead, if feels like people's mentality towards the debt is indifferent, just because we haven't felt all the negative effects yet. a lot of shortsightedness.
The inflation argument is at lest a step in the right direction but considering how much debt most americans have devaluing the dollar is a good thing. It's only the people that it hurts are people that are sitting on static assets. The guy that has $75k in student debt or still owes $100k on his house? Not so much.
The amount of people retiring still underwater on their mortgages is going up as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
