stop spreading negativity, the debt ceilings been raised! life goes on, stop hoping for a catastrophe dude! sell your bullets and silver everything will be fine, you guys have been living in paranoa for years now, dont you guys realize that the governement controls the media that conjures up these phony stories, the economy is fake and controlled. Are people out in the streets rioting???no they are not!
The elites are are scared to death of inflation because they would be hurt most. Deflation would actually help banks and elites who would love a Japan like scenario. The debt ceiling is a false crisis when the real crisis is jobs. It is hard for the economy to grow with 1/5 people not working. Get the economy growing and tax revenues go up and the debt will go down. Austerity now will only make things worse. It is Herbert Hoover economics. They kept trying to balance the budget in the Great Dep.
Inflation hurts everybody as it dimishes purchasing power. It especially hurts the poor and middle class, who can't afford to loose purchasing power. The rich can afford it. So you have it backwards. The elites love inflation because it's a hidden tax.
Austerity WILL make things worse... for a while, but the silver lining is that savings will be rebuilt and everybody will be better off. Going further into debt will simply delay the inevitable, and be worse when it comes.
@myhipsi I believe it is you that have it backwards. With deflation you have high unemployment which hurts the lower middle class and the poor. Your correct in that inflation robs purchasing power. The more purchasing power(dollars saved) you have the more you are hurt. If you have little purchasing power(dollars saved)and lots of debt high inflation greatly helps you because you can pay back your debts with cheaper dollars.
Austerity will make things worse in the short run and long run. imo
I agree that both parties are not serious about debt reduction.What your not getting is that deficit spending grows the economy and the policy makers know this.Cutting spending OR raising taxes would be suicide with the economy so weak.The corporate elites have brainwashed the masses to be overly concerned about the debt.The debt can go as high as infinity as long as inflation is kept under control.But the elites have us brainwashed to be overly concerned with inflation.Google Warren Mosler
How do you think that the new Chinese "Comex" will have a effect on the US Comex? I heard that the first contract went out on Friday the the 22nd of July. How long till the Chinese make the price of Silver and Gold go up? The US government can't do anything about it. You talk about hedging, I think this is the biggest hedge that ANY person or country will see in our lifetime......
You've nailed it again Daniel. I often wonder at which point in history people started believing the politician's lies that America is a Democracy? America was created as a REPUBLIC to protect INDIVIDUALS rights, not as a democracy to pander to the biggest GROUP.
Second, since when did the rich ever willingly aid the poor? How can rich stand w/poor to fight taxes as the poor go hungry with no healthcare or descent quality of life? Who would deny help when you need a doctor? Do those with wealth pay for the poor's ills without being obliged or tax breaks for non-profits/charity? Your point on "tax the rich" as bad I think is possibly simplistic. Obviously, there will always be war with the rich and poor due to imbalance. The point is more complex.
@zithen2 Any person should not be my responsibility to take care of. I have my own life to worry about. Also, my wealth does not automatically make me have to take care of people.
If you go hungry it is not my problem. I am here to live my life, not yours. There are food shelters if you are hungry. Then use the rest of your day looking for work to buy your own food. We are already helping the poor with charities and homeless shelters.
The gap between the rich and the poor is meaningless
@superlucci You really believe the gap between rich and poor is meaningless? Want to live in China, India, Brazil? Where do charities get revenue? With regards to gov spending, is the argument of cutting entitlements a good simple answer? No. We need a detailed, effective plan that ameliorates the social problems and the debt. Cutting healthcare, pensions and welfare will not solve it by itself. U solve the foundation before making cuts, or else the problem will worsen, effecting all of us.
Your entire point had nothing to do with the gap between the rich and the poor being used as statistics.
I dont believe only entitlements need to be cut, we need to end the war, get rid of the federal reserve, do a bunch of things obviously. However entitlement spending is the biggest cause of our debt.
If the rich gain $1million per capita, middle class gained $10,000 per capita, and poor gain $1000 per capita. You would be more furious than --
@zithen2 before simply because the gap between the rich and poor is wider even though every group benefited. This is why the gap between the rich and the poor is meaningless.
Charities get money from donations....obviously.
Welfare needs to be gone. Nobody deserves to take my money and spend it on themselves.
Get rid of entitlements all together, let people keep the money they spend into social security so they can fund their own retirement.
@superlucci Interesting points. If a rich man gave $1000 to charity from his free will or if a government required him to pay taxes to fund social programs, wouldn't both be redistribution? With an abrupt cut, I have my doubts middle to elite classes will give so willingly to social organizations without tax incentives. What will we do when all of these programs get cut? There must be a plan to transition from one budget to the other. No plan + cuts = social unrest. Simple? IDTS.
@zithen2 Redistribution by force is wrong. Somebody giving up their money voluntarily is completely different.
If the middle class and rich dont donate a single penny to charities it still wouldnt be right to forcibly take money from them. However you cannot deny the proof that before the welfare establishment was created, we had a greater amount of charity going on.
We dont need to do anything when these programs get cut, it will be the leeches who will get a job if they want to live
@superlucci You make excellent points. What's the problem at hand and how do you solve it? The hard line approach may or may not be the best way. No way is right for all. If you have an open mind, one might see other possibilities. Consider this: redistribution by law or charity is still redistribution. The real question is: why the "need" to redistribute in the first place? If you got laid off from your job, would you file unemployment? Are you a leech if you do? Wrong is always for others.
End the war, get rid of the Fed Reserve, lift the moratorium on oil, legalize all drugs, get rid of minimum wage, get rid of regulations on business's. Cut entitlements. Get rid of Dep of Edu and Energy
THose are just some things you can do.
Obviously on a person by person basis 1 plan may be better thant he other, but we are talking about the majority best way. And in my opinion the best way to fix this country is to cut spending enormously.
@zithen2 Redistribution by force is different than redistribution by voluntary means.
There was never a need to redistribute in the first place, it was only when Government kept interfering in everything that Democrats, and some Repubs thought it would be swell to take tax payer money and give it to others. If government never overstepped its bounds, these welfare programs would never have happened.
If I got laid off from my job I would get another one.
@superlucci Your answers are ideas, but not solutions, which is why I'm jaded to politics. Ideas become solutions through testing. Many people stand so strong or against an idea w/out thinking about them. For example, why have charities if there is no need for redistribution? Why introduce welfare? Is it that easy to get another job w/the same pay tomorrow? Voters and politicians run on ideas, make them law, then test later, which is why so many fail. Yet, most defend or attack them w/out proof.
@zithen2 How is cutting welfare and Social Security an idea but not a solution? Getting rid of both would basically get rid of our entitlement problem (Well of course Medicare and Medicaid is a problem too, however for the sake of the argument, just these 2).
If you dont have an entitlement program for people to lose their incentive to work, they only have 2 options.
They work. Or they die. Its simple. Its easy. And we know what choice they will make.
@superlucci Cutting spending is only an idea until it manifests.The cuts have not occurred, nor tested, thought out, simulated, etc, thus it is not a solution.
We are intelligent creations. There is more to living than just survival. We need progress, which is why we build objects into space and chimps do not. That is impossible when we don't work together, at war, w/people dying and believing evolution is not required. Welfare was created so the many wouldn't starve in the 1930s.
@zithen2 "Cutting spending is only an idea until it manifests.The cuts have not occurred, nor tested, thought out, simulated, etc, thus it is not a solution."
This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard on this video.
Your logic goes like this.
If I spill red paint on the floor, it wont turn red because we havent thrown the paint on the floor.
Absolutely, fucking, ridiculous.
It is a solution, and it works, when it is tried, just because it hasnt been done yet does not mean it doesnt work
@superlucci A scientist can't say something is true until it is proven. They test ideas. If true, made law. Politicians do it in reverse. A solution solves a problem. True, cutting spending solves a spending problem. But that's hardly the fundamental problem; why we spend. If that's not solved, cut or not, the biz may still fall. Sometimes a solution is a new business model. To say an idea is a solution without proof is much more ridiculous than saying an idea is not a solution without proof.
@zithen2 The problem with your entire paragraph is that you are assuming that a total Free Market and lack of entitlements is somehow not proven to work. The point is is that it HAS proven to work! Over and over again! Go and look before we had the Great Depression, we didnt even have welfare programs, yet you didnt see anybody dying in the street. Why is that? Because people understood that if they didnt work, they didnt eat.
@superlucci Nothing physical can be created out of thin air. This is a law of physics, thus proven. Even the ideas you "create" require food, energy and time for your brain to process. You can't even think without energy around you. If you can't create freely , then there must not be a true "free market." It cannot be absolutely free. Thus, the ideas you have on this are false. Since when was there ever a free market for EVERYBODY?
@zithen2 When I say out of thin air, I dont mean I can rub my hands together and create something. Im talking about what wealth actually is. When I trade 1 dollar for a burger, I am wealthier because it was something I wanted and I was willing to trade.
That is what we mean by wealth. It is a term we use to indicate we have more than what we want.
Your right, I need energy to make my body work. What is your point?
You get energy eating food. How do you get the food? You buy it.
You dont even know what a Free Market even means. It means that you are FREE from GOVERNMENT regulation. We dont mean FREE as in FREE food. We meant it as WE ARE FREE. THE FREE AS IN FREEDOM!
My ideas are not false. Your comprehension is just incredibly low.
You dont even know what it means to be in a Free Market.
@superlucci I understand what free market is. I don't see the proof that forces of supply and demand, if left unchecked by government, could eliminate an imbalance of rich/poor; a system where all people perform in an environment dictated only by market forces. To want and to make a trade is just a tool, a subset of a much larger dynamic, which I don't see being addressed. My point is the problem of war and poverty, something a free market has not proven to ameliorate.
@superlucci If all we were saying is no government intervention = freedom and no poverty, then I'm the bad guy. You said in a free market you can't force anyone to buy your product. This suggested you say a free market allows everyone to be free to buy, sell and create what they want. This to me is false. A monopoly could control the market and be just as imposing as a government; dictating prices and stifling innovation and freedom. So the real problem remains, freedom lost and poverty.
@superlucci I like to do my homework. I did some research on simulations that people have done for free market environments. There are complex variables to its equations that make the claims of the theory inconclusive. We don't have all the answers or proof that a free market achieves what it claims. So people have tested it. But the results aren't all that you claim. It is therefore a theory/idea and not a guaranteed solution. If you choose, search free market simulations and see for yourself.
@superlucci I understand now we had a communications breakdown. I was more describing the definition of a free "market economy" versus "free market", where the small detail was missed. Never thought "free" as in free products. So silly. Free from gov regulation means in essence the dynamics of supply and demand work, giving people the freedom to buy/sell as they choose. A 100% free market has never existed in the US for many reasons. Clever to end and demean a debate based on semantics.
@zithen2 Your stuck in some random hole where you think if a politician spends money on something, then it obviously must be something that we need to look into. The answer is we dont. And its ridiculous to think that.
The best way to get rid of the thought that you have to spend money on the poor people is to regulate the market so that people can get a job. That way they can spend their own money for their survival. And nobody will be forced to pay for them
@zithen2 If the government was a business, they would have failed long ago.
I have told you over and over again. I do have proof. Our system has been tested. Our logic is sound.
You on the other hand, refuse to acknowledge any of my points, and continue to say we just need to help poor people in a different way, which still involves using force to take money from somebody and giving it to somebody else.
@zithen2 Your trying to give me this philosophical crap as to why you should be able to point a gun to my head and take my money. Let me tell you this.
YOU DO NOT stand on the moral high ground when you want to take my money from me by force.
We need progres by stop being regressive and trying to socialize this country.
Your idea of working together means using force to take something which is mine, and thats not working together, thats thievery.
@superlucci I see I've gotten myself in a debate. Look, I've raised more questions then statements on my own beliefs. I don't believe people should give money to charity by force. But something to remember; if you are rich by starting your own company, its not like you do it all by yourself. It takes a team of people to get things done. Some rich people are generous and share their wealth with the team. Others want to keep most of it, thinking its "mine." Its a choice in who you want to be.
@zithen2 A business man who employs people is far more important than the laborers themselves, they are easily replaceable. If you think anybody should be grateful to anybody, if should be the employees being grateful to the employer for having the job in the first place.
In a free market, if you dont like a job, you leave.and get another one. Its simple.
@superlucci A founder is very valuable to a company. But with no laborers to manifest and maintain his/her vision, there would be nothing. Anyone can be replaced, including the founder/CEO. Happens all the time. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It's all one. But some see it differently. I see that everyone is important in their own way. But everyone can be replaced, for its the whole that produces. This is why I don't believe some should be paid less while others are paid more.
@zithen2 Once again, there is no NEED for redistribution. Its just people who have been generous enough to want to care about other people who put their money in.
Forced redistribution is completely different from voluntary redistribution.
Your thinking that since Welfare was created, we obviously needed it. And thats some pretty stupid logic there. Sorry, but it is. Just because somebody creates something, doesnt mean we need it.
@zithen2 I have no doubt its not EASY or anything of that sort. But life isnt supposed to be easy. If you have no experience or skills or any credentials at all, dont expect to somehow land a perfect job. The job you will be getting will likely be an entry level job. Thats not supposed to be a living comfortably wage. However it is a wage where you can survive. Then as years go by, you get raises/ promotions, so that you can live more comfortably.
@zithen2 Your assuming that the politicians who want to return to what we had before the government intervened in our lifes is somehow an idea and not solutions.
If we already have had success with them in the past, then why the hell are you considering them just dieas and not solutions? We have already tested them and they have been successful. Therefore there shouldnt be any reason to not return to those times.
And please, dont bring up unions, or working conditions, or evil businessmen
@superlucci I don't expect your mind will change. However, consider this. A wise man replied to the rich man "Give all your possessions to the poor" when asked the way to Heaven. The rich man said No. Why is this hard for the rich? Because they know in their hearts how wealth is attained and won't own up to it. So many fashion a myth; that they create wealth through great minds and hard work and so, by being more fit, are due wealth while others slave and starve. This is distortion.
@zithen2 Nobody is a damn slave in this world. You can go out and make wealth, its just you have to put in the time and effort into it.
Somebody's irresponsibility in life is not my responsibility, never.
If a man gambled all his money everyday and every time he got more money by begging, he gambled some more, why should I have to care? He is a good for nothing.
You need to get rid of the regulations on business's so that they can hire more people at entry jobs so they have a chance at life
@superlucci It is funny how some see this myth as mimicking "natural law." Wealth cannot be created. Nothing can be created from thin air. The law of Conservation of energy states: energy can only be transformed from one state to another. Read that again.So, if wealth cannot be created, where does it come from? The the rich, especially Conservatives, refuse to answer honestly. Other rich people can answer and they are the ones manipulating both Conservatives, Liberals, and everyone in-between.
@zithen2 Wealth can be created from thin air. Anytime you make any voluntary transaction, you have just created wealth. Because it is something you valued more than what you payed for.
Just because rich people have a majority of the money in the world does not mean you cant go out and get some money for yourself. All you need to do is work for somebody or sell products yourself to make some.
Your believe in the zero sum game, which is garbage. Just because somebody has more money than you does
@superlucci Wealth, just like anything in nature, can ONLY be transformed from one state to another. You can never create wealth out of nothing. It takes work and resources to manifest ideas here. It is impossible for EVERYONE to have whatever they desire for self interest with limited resources. Thus, the reason for imbalance; rich and poor. Do you get my point? If you have the power, you can force people to buy your product. Look at the money in your pocket. Try selling people a new currency.
@zithen2 Wealth is created out of thin air. You think if the rich get richer, than that obviously means the poor has less money than before, which is complete bullshit.
If I buy 1 burger from McD's for 1 dollar. I am now more wealthy than before because I place more emphasis on the burger than I do the dollar. Therefore I am wealthier.
No its not impossible. If oil starts to become scarce, the price will get higher due to rarity, when it becomes too high for people to afford, they buy another-
@superlucci What do you say to an addict who wants to get well? Cut the substance? Go cold turkey, you'll cure the addiction? Maybe in some cases, maybe not; the body put in state of shock and die. Would you give a starved man a five course meal or feed him gradually? Law of inertia: a transition MUST be gradual from 1 state to another otherwise its violent/chaotic. Not caring to accept this is not only unkind to people's problems, its also ignorant in solving those problems realistically IMHO.
@zithen2 Im for legalizing all drugs, however I am for personal responsibility as well.
Somebody getting addicted is not my problem. However since Im sure addiction will be a large number, a private industry and start up their own medical practice for curing addictions. Or maybe Doctors will simply just add on a new procedure dealing will druggies.
The point is is that the druggies are personally responsible for themselves, we shouldnt be bailing them out
@zithen2 I would not give any man or woman anything whatsoever as an American citizen. I am not required to give my money out to anybody whatsoever. And when you have these welfare programs, you are pointing a gun to my head and telling me if I dont pay these taxes then I go to jail.
Now I do understand your point of gradually cutting off something, however I think due to the state we are in as a country, we cannot afford to dillydaddle in time to cut these programs
@zithen2 However if you cut off Welfare immediately. Do you think those people on welfare are going to be in the streets dying? No, I dont think so. Unless they actually wish to die, they will immediately find a job.
Also, let me just say if Ron Paul was President, he would most likely be getting rid of minimum wage, regulations on business's, and then giving a flat tax so that business's will start hiring people, especially at the low paying jobs.
I just wanted to say that I've enjoyed your comments throughout your discussion with "zithen2" and I appreciate your willingness to spend your time engaging in it as thoughtfully as you have.
Discussions such as this may not wake up everyone, but they're bound to wake up a few (and we need as many awake as we can get!)
Thank you for your videos! Watch regularly! Very informative! I thought I'd offer feedback on this. First, the idea that US default is a choice; it seems hard to understand how anyone can choose not to default on their credit and make cuts if credit is used to fund mortgage, energy bills, things one "needs" to survive or stay in business. Many people and business go bankrupt for this reason when they cannot borrow more money to pay expenses. So I don't see the choice to "cut" as trivial.
BOTTOM LINE IS WE ARE GOING TO DEFAULT ANYWAY!!! SOME HOW PEOPLE ARE BRAIN-WASHED INTO THINKING THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO KEEP A 5 STAR CREDIT RATING, AND WE HAVE TO PAAAYYY OUR BIIIIILLLLLLLS.. CAUSE WE ARE A RESPOOOOONCIBLE NATION ... BAAA BAAAAAAAA
I agree with most of what your saying but I have no sympathy for the extremely wealthy power mongers who use their money to write special interest laws and tax codes that let them escape their responsibility for paying and thus need for controlling their gov'ts spending. It's no secret that money controls and runs our gov't and it is/was their responsibility to not only reduce their share of the responsibility but stand up for a financially responsible gov't. They didn't and the bill is now due
Debt ceiling debate is simple gamesmanship - Neither party wants to be left holding the American austerity bag going into an election cycle in 2012 - Simple as that. Our government is ridiculous . Ron Paul 2012 !!
Obama took an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the US. He also took the oath to faithfully perform the duties of the office of the presidency. Defaulting on these duties are a failure to perform what he took the "Oath of Office" for. He has gone around our laws and rights nearly every time to get his agenda passed. Making laws through executive order. Now talking about being able to raise the ceiling without congress. In 2014 it will be ObamaCare he is trying to protect.
US infrastructure is falling apart...roads need worked on, power lines need worked on, trash on the side of the road needs picked up, sidewalks need rebuilt...there are millions of jobs out there that need filled..so instead of "giving" people FREE welfare, unemployment and a vast amount of tax payer money...Make them work on these projects...the government is already paying someone...might as well get some work out of these people. I bet some (if not all) the handouts would stop then! Comments?
@LetsgetphysicalAg Unions will never allow that to happen. Using welfare recipients wont either. Once they do "real work" you have to pay them "real wages". Maybe you didn't know what 120% of poverty means. That is what they live on. Some persons would have you believe. Being on welfare is just one big free "Party in the PJ's". Which is farther from the truth. Imagine trying to house and feed a family of say 4 on what amounts to about $1000 a month including food.
@benshivd That is what is wrong with this socialist country! I know people who would rather recive unemployment benifits then get a job....because you and I know....there ARE jobs out there! Ive seen people who dont look for jobs because the government is giving "FREE" money away...why should they have to work? A family of 4 (or anybody) should NEVER live beyond their means so when these types of problems arise they are not in huge trouble! But like I said....that is the problem with this ......
@LetsgetphysicalAg Collecting Unemployment is not welfare. Its apples and oranges. Unemployment insurance is paid by empolyers rather than extorted from taxpayers against their wills.. There IS a big difference. When the benefits are "extended" that means Employers' "premiums" increase. The subsides the states receive are a loan to be paid back. Not like welfare which is a handout or a grant and are not paid back.
@benshivd Have I offended you in any way? Why are you offending me? Keep it clean and "grown up". Now tell me...what do you not like in my response? I feel this country is in the shit hole its in because of the hand outs to everybody from corporate banks to welfare recipiants who abuse the system. What is so "retarded" about that? Sounds like a valid point dont you think? prove me wrong!
@benshivd The quotes you have copied from me to me I stand firm on those quotes....We are in a shit hole now...dont you think its time for change? Get rid of Unions and make a change! We the people have the power to remove such organizations. How is it that its "socialism" to earn your unemployment check? How?? You talk but dont back it up! How is it socialism to make people work for their unemployment checks instead of sitting on their asses? You are the one who sounds mentaly ill pal!
@LetsgetphysicalAg I never said unemployment is socialism. Its insurance paid by employers on their employees. Except when it is federally extended then it is a subsidy to the state, a loan. Its not free money. When you get laid off and the only job you find if at all. Is half the money than you made working. Or your unemployment may be more than you can now make. Your going to go with whats best.Your lack of knowledge of the difference in welfare and unemployment is clear.Try2 read b4 you bleed
@benshivd Bro...Listen...PLEASE...its because of people not wanting to change a system that is broken that problems (like the one this country is in) will always exsist! Unemployment benifits are awesome...I think they are great, but if people are going to be sitting around for as long as 99 weeks (doing nothing)...why can they work for the checks? Picking up garbage on the side of the road, fixing bridges, getting atleast some training...people abuse the system because they dont have to.....
@benshivd CONT...actually try to get a job! This system is so screwed up, we (the people) are the true government of the US, we should start makeing that a rule to get unemployment benifits...Hear me out...I know it sounds dumb, but like I said, the system is not working the way it is right now, so it wont hurt to change a few things and putting people to work for their checks is NOT a bad idea... The money has to come from somewhere, and weather it be insurance money, its still hurts the.....
@benshivd CONT 2...hurts the country to be giving out so much money for nothing. Think about it for a minute...Where is all that money coming from? Its not coming out of thin air...the Fed still has to print it and thus making the dollar even more worthless....So why not make the recipients earn their check? I would do it in a heart beat....wouldnt you? Wouldnt any America loving citizen? I think they would....its a good idea that should be talked about! Thats all Im saying!
@benshivd CONT....country we want things to get fixed (our economy, our money problems, wars and everything) but nobody wants to change or sqeeze their belts a little! I mean come on....can you actually say all people on welfare really need it? What if the government did stop these welfare programs, do you really think all these people would just die? I think they would do anything in their power to survive! (and that means getting a job). If America wants change, we gotta allow it to happen!
@LetsgetphysicalAg If welfare stopped tomorrow. Some would try and get a job sure. but with the market the way it is.There will be riots, robberies, looting. An overall increase of crime. AKA Greece , Ireland? When you are held on the edge of poverty and have little to loose. It takes only a very small spark to ignite a huge firestorm. Personally i think this is exactly the plan. "Cant let a good disaster go to waste" right Rom ?
@benshivd Rom?? Nah, Come on...those who go look for a job, will get a job...those who dont find a job can work for the government doing the infrastructure jobs that I mentioned...Do you really think they are going to give a damn about "unions" or "real work and real wages"? Hell no, their first goal is to survive! I mean if we are to turn this country around we gotta turn things around. "In order for Evil and destruction to flourish, all that is required is for good men to do nothing! Ed Burk.
@LetsgetphysicalAg Yeah i mean Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff. wwwyoutubecom/watch?v=1yeA_kHHLow .Did you know 80 % of all the supposed stimulus funds went to unions? We all know they need to completely tear down our Free Market Republic to usher in a Socialist Society. We dont want MORE reliance on government.For the last couple decades especially our children Have been taught in school its ok to not work for what you need. You will be owed your fair share. There are no loosers etc
@benshivd Welfare and food stamps do not exsist in a free market capitalistic economy, there is no such thing as an intitlement...No one is entitled to anything! Such programs are socialistic and communistic not capitalistic! Further more such programs have proven to be disasterous even in socialistic and communistic ecomonies which are specifically designed for such things. To think that such programs could be sucessful in a capitalistic economy is plain stupid!
@benshivd Cont.. You and I have NO obligation to aid others when it is other peoples responibilities to fend for themselves. Such things are not the responsibilites of the federal or state government...its personal responsiblities! In a capital country state that if you dont work, you dont eat! plain and simple! Welfare and food stamps encourage irresponsible behavior and offer an incentve to not work, to not take care of yourself and be lazy! Social welfare should be left to the private sector!
@benshivd Cont 2... There are charities, church groups, community services that can handle such issues. If the person is such a lazy pile of shit that the persons family, friends and neighbors are unwilling to help in a time of need...then the person should starve to death. If your friends and family dont care about you...why should I? It is unethical and unjust to expect to anyone should be forced to give you anything...if you want something...then you earn it!
@LetsgetphysicalAg QUOTE :"those who dont find a job can work for the government doing the infrastructure jobs that I mentioned" Thats socialism right there. QUOTE: ".Do you really think they are going to give a damn about "unions" or "real work and real wages"? They dont really have much of a choice they are the most organised at the moment. Thats who got almost all of the stimulus and along with acorn got Obama elected. With the disenfranchised republican voters looking for "change"
@LetsgetphysicalAg Unemployment is paid by the Employer to the state. The Employee pays for it already by sweat equity. Since you have to work a set amount of time to even qualify for unemployment. You need to stop lumping unemployment with welfare. They are nothing alike Welfare is a grant you get with almost no obligation.Unemployment you earn by working x amount of hours. As far as sitting around collecting unemployment. I have no problem with it. They earned that right. But not for 99 weeks.
i have to argue with the fact that the rich pay so much in taxes...they pay much less because they have the best accountants that find loopholes to where they actually get tax credits...alot of what you say is sound but that argument i just mentioned is based on teabagger talking points
@Riddlerx333x The Fed isn't buying all of the debt, but they are buying a lot of it. Many of these bondbuyers are selling the Tsy's back to the Fed, but some are not.
True the US government does take in enough wealth to pay the interest on the national debt. But only by say: "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" The money the US takes in every month is committed to several causes . China ,Japan ,Middle East etc.. can only be payed if other obligations are ignored and not paid.
These people who are no longer receiving money ,will become extremely angry as a result & massive social unrest in the USA will occur.
You were one of those guys with the NIA right? You left though rite cuz they're scammers? Anyway I really WANT THE DEBT CEILING TO REMAIN so the chaos they think will happen CAN. America is BS and I'm tired of working for corporate scum bags
For the first time in history Bush fought wars on tax cuts. That's the problem, someone has to pay for these wars. Whose it going to be if it's not the American people? Where is the money coming from? If you are going to fight wars you have to pay and the way to pay is in taxes.
@movieklump Bush fought his wars on Borrowed money. Even still his debt pales in comparison in his 8 years to the historical debt in 2.5 years of Obama. This administration has more debt than ALL the the other administrations combined in our history. Projected 20 trillion by 2014 now.
@benshivd Debt begets debt. Obama took over after the 2008 debacle with unemployment on the rise. The system was broken. He tied in vain to inject funds into the economy to save jobs. Bush was an idiot. He gave Obama nothing but a wrecked economy. Would the Austrian strategy have worked with the huge unemployment and lost savings from destroyed banks? I think not. It's only advocate Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution so he obviously has a flawed reason and no chance to win.
@movieklump OMG its Bush's fault. Have you heard of the Fair Housing act ? Started by Carter and continued by Clinton. Then Strictly enforced when congress was taken over by the Dems in 2006. Which FORCED banks to make loans to people that could not afford them ? Look it up. The banks answer was sub-prime loans. Which yes were allowed by the LACK of regulation on Bush's part. So yes he is partly to blame. Barney Frank , Geightner and those that ran Fanny and Freddy did the rest.Dont be a retard
@movieklump NO, you cut some of the foreign aid and these bullshit "entitlement" programs. There have to be cuts, people getting checks for free will have to buy store brands and do the cutting back that working families are having to make.
@vambo13257 Why blame the most unfortunate in society for the mistakes/greed of the oligarchs. The US spends more jails than they do on entitlement programs. But if you cut entitlement programs you will need more jails because families will be desperate. How do you feed your family if there are no jobs? It costs more to put someone in jail than it does to give them entitlements. The US already has more incarcerated people than any other country.
@movieklump Did I say anything about jails? What the hell are you talking about? Most of the "unfortunate" are "unfortunate" either by their own doing or by being stuck on the hind tit of society by liberal do-gooders like yourself!
@vambo13257 If a family can't get a job or unemployment how are they going to eat? They either starve or steal and if they steal they go to jail. Can't you see the connection? Do you maintain that the real figure of 19 per cent unemployment in America is the fault of 1 in 5 Americans? If so I would immigrate to better country like China were the company making Apple Ipads has had 15 suicides this year due to working conditions.
@DRationalOne Very Very good point. Plus, the amount of people sucking from the system already is like spotting "more of the same" politicians 30% of the vote every time.
The invidious cowards who inhabit Washington are unwilling to restructure the largest banks and GSEs [government sponsored enterprises, like Fannie and Freddie]. The reluctance comes partly from what truths restructuring will reveal. As a result, these same large zombie banks and the U.S. economy will continue to shrink under the weight of bad debt, public and private. Remember that the Dodd-Frank legislation was not so much about financial reform as protecting the housing GSEs.
The thing that annoys me the most is that this dumbass employees say "tax the rich". Who do you think is going to get screwed in that transaction? The rich are who provide jobs not the poor. So if they are taxed more your forcing them to cut their expenses to pay the tax. They are still going to keep everything they have with the only difference that all these poor employees are going to be jobless because THEY wanted to tax the rich. Come people get educated, and stop being parrots!!
@Sorry but the Rich GOT there in Large part by EVADING their "Fair Share" of Taxes! BUY OFF A Few Legislators and get HUGE tax breaks to move your manufacturing "offshore"?! Talk about screwing workers - - Twice!
Meanwhile, the "capitalists" enjoy private jets, Luxury SUVs, 2nd homes & other "business" expenses at tax DISCOUNTS - while the workers who actually CREATE the Wealth are SUBSIDIZING them!
What we need is PUBLICLY Funded elections so that the privileged can't BUY Lawmakers!
they own and license the media, so the outcome of any disaster is always too much freedom for the slaves and too little power for the rulers. If the media would stop to play ball, bad things would happen to them.
Reality can not be beaten, however. The crisis will continue, no matter if they make people take it with a smile.
here in the uk if you earn over £150k then you pay 50% tax. that's on top of the 20% VAT and council tax etc. i'm sick and tired of governments spend spend spending....thats why the world is in so much problems...scum-sucking socialists!!!
I think it is insane that some politicians in Washington want to raise revenue by increase taxes and not by nurturing renewed manufacturing. If America were to start producing more of the goods we purchase like tennis shoes, clothing, cell phones, power tools, etc. perhaps the increased employment would provide additional earned revenue.
Also, a constitutional mandate should be put into place that requires a reduction of Washington's debt by 10% of GDP per year until it is paid off.
here is the problem with your logic. government is not a household or a business. if a middle class household is making $2200 a month and spending $3700, but have a billion dollar credit line, that is sustainable for a very long time.
low rent sounds nice, how about fuck the bank bailouts and make them all 'correct', well it might be too late .....buy more silver.....wtf, i been tellin my aunt to sell her shit extra car and buy silver so she can have a chance, so she makes up lame ass excuses like it's hard to store it at home....and then she talked to an old friend who 'did' silver yrs ago....lol....why listen to the guy who missed adding a zero to his investment, maybe he could be helping out his kids that are 5 to a room.
It doe's not matter. The US will always be in debt. QE3 will come than QE4 ans so on. America will go on. We will just pay more. That is the bottom line.
Yes, the US has it's problems, but I would not want to live any where else in the world.
You are incorrect, a bankrupt and jobless US cannot pay off its debt . The governments current income is a byproduct of an economy stimulated by debt. Remove that stimulation and the governments income will shrink to earnings derived from taxing exports - 30% of 1.2T.
@LivCheaplyAndProsper I was only speaking about the actual debt interest payments, I agree, the US can not and will never pay off its debt. You bring up a great point about how US income would collapse without the ponzi scheme of government paying people/injecting money into the economy and then collecting taxes on their income and transactions.
@darbone Another factoid for you. Speaking of "Assets". Did you know, through Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. The government are the underwriters to nearly 95% of ALL mortgages in the US? Default or otherwise. That means what we denied allowing them to take our land. Violating our property rights. Through eminent domain laws etc. for centuries. Yet in less than a decade. We have just handed or property and our rights along with it right over to them.
@darbone, Sell to who?, all countries are in debt. Governments and people have been burrowing from banks that didn't have the wealth. The worlds economy has blue screened in a divide by zero error.
An ex-CIA agent has went public and stated that the 2012 election has already been decided..... Obama will be the winner. And there will not be another president after him. Don't shoot the messenger.
There will be NO cuts. Daniel and I both know this. They are talking out of both sides of their ass which they refer to as their mouth. IMO the rich the poor and the middle class should all pay the same percentage of Income tax. Everyone contribute 20% or any number you chose of their income as tax. That is the only truly FAIR way to pay income tax. Everyone pays the same percentage of their wages. One guy paying 35% while one pays 15% is so unfair its ridiculous.
Remember, buffet said he pays less taxes than his secretary ! the rich have too many friends in the government that allows them not to pay there fair share , on a regular basis ! not right.
The best credit rating is an interest rate set by the free market.
When a creditor and a lender agree on their own interest rates, that rate is what the market determined as the risk of lending to that particular borrower.
There's a good reason we should be worried about rising interest rates. It would imply that demand for our debt has gone down. The demand for our debt is our credit rating.
The rent needs to come down actually. The current condition is insane. 48122 Melvindale Mi, you can buy a 2br house for under 20k. But if you own it, the government will give you $762 a month for section 8 housing. So again the middle class suffers. Credit scores and down payments wont allow them to buy the house, and they can't afford to rent it because tax dollars are jacking up the cost. The free market should determine rental value, not section 8 stats.
If the government voluntarily defaults on the national debt and its Treasury Bonds, it is patently illegal and unconstitutional. I will absolutely hound my Congressmen and Senators to impeach this president and imprison Geithner and Bernanke. A few days ago former president Bill Clinton stated that if it were up to him, he would use the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the national debt ceiling and let the courts try to reverse it. These people are monstrous vampiric ghouls.
The ULTRA RICH hide their money in Foundation/Trust and pull out the minimum and donate the minimum amount and are taxed at the lowest rate. Name one Ultra rich who is NOT in a Foundation..................Zero. Charity my ass!
I like how the Democrats, who didn't propose the 2010 budget, are now THE BUDGET CUTTERS after voting for all his failure. Pity so few cannot discern the truth that Obama still has 44% of people who think this guy is doing something responsible. When Obama says he's fighting, who is he fighting against? The middle Class?
I just don't know, when they sign this packaged deal when Bush was in office they put a lot of time and money and claim the package should last till 2014. This just seems like a political reason. Republicans didn't even bother to do a economic impact it would be to make the trillions of tax cuts they request for. I say wait till 2014. But, always be on high alert, politics come and go.
You try to make it clear, but the parasites dont want to hear it.
limppimento55 6 months ago
SnP just another illuminati control tool; why treat this seriously!
bullsnutsoz 6 months ago
Memo to illuminati; dig your bunkers much deeper; Hitler would also tell you this, problem being it gets so much hotter!
bullsnutsoz 6 months ago
Who voted against raising the debt ceiling?
95 Democrats and 66 Republicans exactly - voted against the bill
The US credit rating was downgraded because the bill didn't contain enough cuts.
vechorik 6 months ago
didnt the banks ask for the government to bail them out??
are the interest rates going up after this debt ceiling increase and "cuts" ??
HumanityWins 6 months ago
stop spreading negativity, the debt ceilings been raised! life goes on, stop hoping for a catastrophe dude! sell your bullets and silver everything will be fine, you guys have been living in paranoa for years now, dont you guys realize that the governement controls the media that conjures up these phony stories, the economy is fake and controlled. Are people out in the streets rioting???no they are not!
zephyr2046 6 months ago
The elites are are scared to death of inflation because they would be hurt most. Deflation would actually help banks and elites who would love a Japan like scenario. The debt ceiling is a false crisis when the real crisis is jobs. It is hard for the economy to grow with 1/5 people not working. Get the economy growing and tax revenues go up and the debt will go down. Austerity now will only make things worse. It is Herbert Hoover economics. They kept trying to balance the budget in the Great Dep.
BornAgainChristian24 7 months ago
@BornAgainChristian24
Inflation hurts everybody as it dimishes purchasing power. It especially hurts the poor and middle class, who can't afford to loose purchasing power. The rich can afford it. So you have it backwards. The elites love inflation because it's a hidden tax.
Austerity WILL make things worse... for a while, but the silver lining is that savings will be rebuilt and everybody will be better off. Going further into debt will simply delay the inevitable, and be worse when it comes.
myhipsi 6 months ago
@myhipsi I believe it is you that have it backwards. With deflation you have high unemployment which hurts the lower middle class and the poor. Your correct in that inflation robs purchasing power. The more purchasing power(dollars saved) you have the more you are hurt. If you have little purchasing power(dollars saved)and lots of debt high inflation greatly helps you because you can pay back your debts with cheaper dollars.
Austerity will make things worse in the short run and long run. imo
BornAgainChristian24 6 months ago
I agree that both parties are not serious about debt reduction.What your not getting is that deficit spending grows the economy and the policy makers know this.Cutting spending OR raising taxes would be suicide with the economy so weak.The corporate elites have brainwashed the masses to be overly concerned about the debt.The debt can go as high as infinity as long as inflation is kept under control.But the elites have us brainwashed to be overly concerned with inflation.Google Warren Mosler
BornAgainChristian24 7 months ago
@BornAgainChristian24
mises . org
continuityofliberty 6 months ago
@continuityofliberty No thanks, I got MMT moslereconomics . com
BornAgainChristian24 6 months ago
This mess is everybody's fault.
TheEditor80 7 months ago
amerika deficit spends 12 % of GDP
to achieve 1.5 % GDP growth...
long silver
chena3 7 months ago
thanks as always!!
chromedreamz 7 months ago
How do you think that the new Chinese "Comex" will have a effect on the US Comex? I heard that the first contract went out on Friday the the 22nd of July. How long till the Chinese make the price of Silver and Gold go up? The US government can't do anything about it. You talk about hedging, I think this is the biggest hedge that ANY person or country will see in our lifetime......
Any thoughts??
9FINGRS
cb27927 7 months ago
You've nailed it again Daniel. I often wonder at which point in history people started believing the politician's lies that America is a Democracy? America was created as a REPUBLIC to protect INDIVIDUALS rights, not as a democracy to pander to the biggest GROUP.
lukehawthorne 7 months ago
Second, since when did the rich ever willingly aid the poor? How can rich stand w/poor to fight taxes as the poor go hungry with no healthcare or descent quality of life? Who would deny help when you need a doctor? Do those with wealth pay for the poor's ills without being obliged or tax breaks for non-profits/charity? Your point on "tax the rich" as bad I think is possibly simplistic. Obviously, there will always be war with the rich and poor due to imbalance. The point is more complex.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Any person should not be my responsibility to take care of. I have my own life to worry about. Also, my wealth does not automatically make me have to take care of people.
If you go hungry it is not my problem. I am here to live my life, not yours. There are food shelters if you are hungry. Then use the rest of your day looking for work to buy your own food. We are already helping the poor with charities and homeless shelters.
The gap between the rich and the poor is meaningless
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci You really believe the gap between rich and poor is meaningless? Want to live in China, India, Brazil? Where do charities get revenue? With regards to gov spending, is the argument of cutting entitlements a good simple answer? No. We need a detailed, effective plan that ameliorates the social problems and the debt. Cutting healthcare, pensions and welfare will not solve it by itself. U solve the foundation before making cuts, or else the problem will worsen, effecting all of us.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Im talking about in the United States.
Your entire point had nothing to do with the gap between the rich and the poor being used as statistics.
I dont believe only entitlements need to be cut, we need to end the war, get rid of the federal reserve, do a bunch of things obviously. However entitlement spending is the biggest cause of our debt.
If the rich gain $1million per capita, middle class gained $10,000 per capita, and poor gain $1000 per capita. You would be more furious than --
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 before simply because the gap between the rich and poor is wider even though every group benefited. This is why the gap between the rich and the poor is meaningless.
Charities get money from donations....obviously.
Welfare needs to be gone. Nobody deserves to take my money and spend it on themselves.
Get rid of entitlements all together, let people keep the money they spend into social security so they can fund their own retirement.
Cutting welfare does solve redistribution
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci Interesting points. If a rich man gave $1000 to charity from his free will or if a government required him to pay taxes to fund social programs, wouldn't both be redistribution? With an abrupt cut, I have my doubts middle to elite classes will give so willingly to social organizations without tax incentives. What will we do when all of these programs get cut? There must be a plan to transition from one budget to the other. No plan + cuts = social unrest. Simple? IDTS.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Redistribution by force is wrong. Somebody giving up their money voluntarily is completely different.
If the middle class and rich dont donate a single penny to charities it still wouldnt be right to forcibly take money from them. However you cannot deny the proof that before the welfare establishment was created, we had a greater amount of charity going on.
We dont need to do anything when these programs get cut, it will be the leeches who will get a job if they want to live
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci You make excellent points. What's the problem at hand and how do you solve it? The hard line approach may or may not be the best way. No way is right for all. If you have an open mind, one might see other possibilities. Consider this: redistribution by law or charity is still redistribution. The real question is: why the "need" to redistribute in the first place? If you got laid off from your job, would you file unemployment? Are you a leech if you do? Wrong is always for others.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 You get rid of the programs, simple.
End the war, get rid of the Fed Reserve, lift the moratorium on oil, legalize all drugs, get rid of minimum wage, get rid of regulations on business's. Cut entitlements. Get rid of Dep of Edu and Energy
THose are just some things you can do.
Obviously on a person by person basis 1 plan may be better thant he other, but we are talking about the majority best way. And in my opinion the best way to fix this country is to cut spending enormously.
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Redistribution by force is different than redistribution by voluntary means.
There was never a need to redistribute in the first place, it was only when Government kept interfering in everything that Democrats, and some Repubs thought it would be swell to take tax payer money and give it to others. If government never overstepped its bounds, these welfare programs would never have happened.
If I got laid off from my job I would get another one.
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci Your answers are ideas, but not solutions, which is why I'm jaded to politics. Ideas become solutions through testing. Many people stand so strong or against an idea w/out thinking about them. For example, why have charities if there is no need for redistribution? Why introduce welfare? Is it that easy to get another job w/the same pay tomorrow? Voters and politicians run on ideas, make them law, then test later, which is why so many fail. Yet, most defend or attack them w/out proof.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 How is cutting welfare and Social Security an idea but not a solution? Getting rid of both would basically get rid of our entitlement problem (Well of course Medicare and Medicaid is a problem too, however for the sake of the argument, just these 2).
If you dont have an entitlement program for people to lose their incentive to work, they only have 2 options.
They work. Or they die. Its simple. Its easy. And we know what choice they will make.
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci Cutting spending is only an idea until it manifests.The cuts have not occurred, nor tested, thought out, simulated, etc, thus it is not a solution.
We are intelligent creations. There is more to living than just survival. We need progress, which is why we build objects into space and chimps do not. That is impossible when we don't work together, at war, w/people dying and believing evolution is not required. Welfare was created so the many wouldn't starve in the 1930s.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 "Cutting spending is only an idea until it manifests.The cuts have not occurred, nor tested, thought out, simulated, etc, thus it is not a solution."
This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard on this video.
Your logic goes like this.
If I spill red paint on the floor, it wont turn red because we havent thrown the paint on the floor.
Absolutely, fucking, ridiculous.
It is a solution, and it works, when it is tried, just because it hasnt been done yet does not mean it doesnt work
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci A scientist can't say something is true until it is proven. They test ideas. If true, made law. Politicians do it in reverse. A solution solves a problem. True, cutting spending solves a spending problem. But that's hardly the fundamental problem; why we spend. If that's not solved, cut or not, the biz may still fall. Sometimes a solution is a new business model. To say an idea is a solution without proof is much more ridiculous than saying an idea is not a solution without proof.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 The problem with your entire paragraph is that you are assuming that a total Free Market and lack of entitlements is somehow not proven to work. The point is is that it HAS proven to work! Over and over again! Go and look before we had the Great Depression, we didnt even have welfare programs, yet you didnt see anybody dying in the street. Why is that? Because people understood that if they didnt work, they didnt eat.
That mindset made them get some work
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci Nothing physical can be created out of thin air. This is a law of physics, thus proven. Even the ideas you "create" require food, energy and time for your brain to process. You can't even think without energy around you. If you can't create freely , then there must not be a true "free market." It cannot be absolutely free. Thus, the ideas you have on this are false. Since when was there ever a free market for EVERYBODY?
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 When I say out of thin air, I dont mean I can rub my hands together and create something. Im talking about what wealth actually is. When I trade 1 dollar for a burger, I am wealthier because it was something I wanted and I was willing to trade.
That is what we mean by wealth. It is a term we use to indicate we have more than what we want.
Your right, I need energy to make my body work. What is your point?
You get energy eating food. How do you get the food? You buy it.
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Oh. My. God.
You dont even know what a Free Market even means. It means that you are FREE from GOVERNMENT regulation. We dont mean FREE as in FREE food. We meant it as WE ARE FREE. THE FREE AS IN FREEDOM!
My ideas are not false. Your comprehension is just incredibly low.
You dont even know what it means to be in a Free Market.
Go look up some Thomas Sowell please.
superlucci 7 months ago
Comment removed
zithen2 7 months ago
@superlucci I understand what free market is. I don't see the proof that forces of supply and demand, if left unchecked by government, could eliminate an imbalance of rich/poor; a system where all people perform in an environment dictated only by market forces. To want and to make a trade is just a tool, a subset of a much larger dynamic, which I don't see being addressed. My point is the problem of war and poverty, something a free market has not proven to ameliorate.
zithen2 7 months ago
@superlucci If all we were saying is no government intervention = freedom and no poverty, then I'm the bad guy. You said in a free market you can't force anyone to buy your product. This suggested you say a free market allows everyone to be free to buy, sell and create what they want. This to me is false. A monopoly could control the market and be just as imposing as a government; dictating prices and stifling innovation and freedom. So the real problem remains, freedom lost and poverty.
zithen2 7 months ago
@superlucci I like to do my homework. I did some research on simulations that people have done for free market environments. There are complex variables to its equations that make the claims of the theory inconclusive. We don't have all the answers or proof that a free market achieves what it claims. So people have tested it. But the results aren't all that you claim. It is therefore a theory/idea and not a guaranteed solution. If you choose, search free market simulations and see for yourself.
zithen2 7 months ago
@superlucci I understand now we had a communications breakdown. I was more describing the definition of a free "market economy" versus "free market", where the small detail was missed. Never thought "free" as in free products. So silly. Free from gov regulation means in essence the dynamics of supply and demand work, giving people the freedom to buy/sell as they choose. A 100% free market has never existed in the US for many reasons. Clever to end and demean a debate based on semantics.
zithen2 6 months ago
@zithen2 Your stuck in some random hole where you think if a politician spends money on something, then it obviously must be something that we need to look into. The answer is we dont. And its ridiculous to think that.
The best way to get rid of the thought that you have to spend money on the poor people is to regulate the market so that people can get a job. That way they can spend their own money for their survival. And nobody will be forced to pay for them
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 If the government was a business, they would have failed long ago.
I have told you over and over again. I do have proof. Our system has been tested. Our logic is sound.
You on the other hand, refuse to acknowledge any of my points, and continue to say we just need to help poor people in a different way, which still involves using force to take money from somebody and giving it to somebody else.
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Your trying to give me this philosophical crap as to why you should be able to point a gun to my head and take my money. Let me tell you this.
YOU DO NOT stand on the moral high ground when you want to take my money from me by force.
We need progres by stop being regressive and trying to socialize this country.
Your idea of working together means using force to take something which is mine, and thats not working together, thats thievery.
Welfare has created so many leeches
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci I see I've gotten myself in a debate. Look, I've raised more questions then statements on my own beliefs. I don't believe people should give money to charity by force. But something to remember; if you are rich by starting your own company, its not like you do it all by yourself. It takes a team of people to get things done. Some rich people are generous and share their wealth with the team. Others want to keep most of it, thinking its "mine." Its a choice in who you want to be.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 A business man who employs people is far more important than the laborers themselves, they are easily replaceable. If you think anybody should be grateful to anybody, if should be the employees being grateful to the employer for having the job in the first place.
In a free market, if you dont like a job, you leave.and get another one. Its simple.
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci A founder is very valuable to a company. But with no laborers to manifest and maintain his/her vision, there would be nothing. Anyone can be replaced, including the founder/CEO. Happens all the time. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It's all one. But some see it differently. I see that everyone is important in their own way. But everyone can be replaced, for its the whole that produces. This is why I don't believe some should be paid less while others are paid more.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Once again, there is no NEED for redistribution. Its just people who have been generous enough to want to care about other people who put their money in.
Forced redistribution is completely different from voluntary redistribution.
Your thinking that since Welfare was created, we obviously needed it. And thats some pretty stupid logic there. Sorry, but it is. Just because somebody creates something, doesnt mean we need it.
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 I have no doubt its not EASY or anything of that sort. But life isnt supposed to be easy. If you have no experience or skills or any credentials at all, dont expect to somehow land a perfect job. The job you will be getting will likely be an entry level job. Thats not supposed to be a living comfortably wage. However it is a wage where you can survive. Then as years go by, you get raises/ promotions, so that you can live more comfortably.
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Your assuming that the politicians who want to return to what we had before the government intervened in our lifes is somehow an idea and not solutions.
If we already have had success with them in the past, then why the hell are you considering them just dieas and not solutions? We have already tested them and they have been successful. Therefore there shouldnt be any reason to not return to those times.
And please, dont bring up unions, or working conditions, or evil businessmen
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci I don't expect your mind will change. However, consider this. A wise man replied to the rich man "Give all your possessions to the poor" when asked the way to Heaven. The rich man said No. Why is this hard for the rich? Because they know in their hearts how wealth is attained and won't own up to it. So many fashion a myth; that they create wealth through great minds and hard work and so, by being more fit, are due wealth while others slave and starve. This is distortion.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 What the hell does your example have anything to do with real life?
Why is giving up their hard earned money hard for the rich? Thats simple, BECAUSE IF THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY!
If a poor man didnt want to give up his money because it was his, what makes you think somebody who has more money than him would want to either?
We all work in our self interests. Thats a fact, that will never change.
Rich know that innovation/ingenuity/hard work is what creates wealth, leeches dont know it
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Nobody is a damn slave in this world. You can go out and make wealth, its just you have to put in the time and effort into it.
Somebody's irresponsibility in life is not my responsibility, never.
If a man gambled all his money everyday and every time he got more money by begging, he gambled some more, why should I have to care? He is a good for nothing.
You need to get rid of the regulations on business's so that they can hire more people at entry jobs so they have a chance at life
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci It is funny how some see this myth as mimicking "natural law." Wealth cannot be created. Nothing can be created from thin air. The law of Conservation of energy states: energy can only be transformed from one state to another. Read that again.So, if wealth cannot be created, where does it come from? The the rich, especially Conservatives, refuse to answer honestly. Other rich people can answer and they are the ones manipulating both Conservatives, Liberals, and everyone in-between.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Wealth can be created from thin air. Anytime you make any voluntary transaction, you have just created wealth. Because it is something you valued more than what you payed for.
Just because rich people have a majority of the money in the world does not mean you cant go out and get some money for yourself. All you need to do is work for somebody or sell products yourself to make some.
Your believe in the zero sum game, which is garbage. Just because somebody has more money than you does
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 mean that your chance to get money has lowered.
Wealth is created from Free trade the majority of the time.
The free market would allow everybody to pursue their self interest and by pursuing their self interest, they help everybody else out as well.
You on the other hand ill look at a rich person and think "Gosh, wonder how many times he has screwed over somebody to get so rich?"
He hasnt, he has gotten their by selling a product.
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci Wealth, just like anything in nature, can ONLY be transformed from one state to another. You can never create wealth out of nothing. It takes work and resources to manifest ideas here. It is impossible for EVERYONE to have whatever they desire for self interest with limited resources. Thus, the reason for imbalance; rich and poor. Do you get my point? If you have the power, you can force people to buy your product. Look at the money in your pocket. Try selling people a new currency.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Wealth is created out of thin air. You think if the rich get richer, than that obviously means the poor has less money than before, which is complete bullshit.
If I buy 1 burger from McD's for 1 dollar. I am now more wealthy than before because I place more emphasis on the burger than I do the dollar. Therefore I am wealthier.
No its not impossible. If oil starts to become scarce, the price will get higher due to rarity, when it becomes too high for people to afford, they buy another-
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 Another resource, since that other resource will now be profitable due to the high price of oil.
Obviously its impossible for everybody to have everything, obviously.
However that is not the reason why the rich are rich and the poor are poor. The rich have sold a product that people wanted and the poor have not.
Wrong! If you have power, in a free market, you CANT FORCE anybody to buy your product! Its impossible!
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 There does not need to be any transition from 1 plan to another plan. We simply need to get rid of the Welfare State period.
Getting rid of the incentive to stay unemployed will force people to get a job.
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci What do you say to an addict who wants to get well? Cut the substance? Go cold turkey, you'll cure the addiction? Maybe in some cases, maybe not; the body put in state of shock and die. Would you give a starved man a five course meal or feed him gradually? Law of inertia: a transition MUST be gradual from 1 state to another otherwise its violent/chaotic. Not caring to accept this is not only unkind to people's problems, its also ignorant in solving those problems realistically IMHO.
zithen2 7 months ago
@zithen2 Im for legalizing all drugs, however I am for personal responsibility as well.
Somebody getting addicted is not my problem. However since Im sure addiction will be a large number, a private industry and start up their own medical practice for curing addictions. Or maybe Doctors will simply just add on a new procedure dealing will druggies.
The point is is that the druggies are personally responsible for themselves, we shouldnt be bailing them out
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 I would not give any man or woman anything whatsoever as an American citizen. I am not required to give my money out to anybody whatsoever. And when you have these welfare programs, you are pointing a gun to my head and telling me if I dont pay these taxes then I go to jail.
Now I do understand your point of gradually cutting off something, however I think due to the state we are in as a country, we cannot afford to dillydaddle in time to cut these programs
superlucci 7 months ago
@zithen2 However if you cut off Welfare immediately. Do you think those people on welfare are going to be in the streets dying? No, I dont think so. Unless they actually wish to die, they will immediately find a job.
Also, let me just say if Ron Paul was President, he would most likely be getting rid of minimum wage, regulations on business's, and then giving a flat tax so that business's will start hiring people, especially at the low paying jobs.
Welfare would not be the first thing he does
superlucci 7 months ago
@superlucci
I just wanted to say that I've enjoyed your comments throughout your discussion with "zithen2" and I appreciate your willingness to spend your time engaging in it as thoughtfully as you have.
Discussions such as this may not wake up everyone, but they're bound to wake up a few (and we need as many awake as we can get!)
continuityofliberty 6 months ago
@continuityofliberty Thanks man. Indeed, even a little is something
superlucci 6 months ago
Thank you for your videos! Watch regularly! Very informative! I thought I'd offer feedback on this. First, the idea that US default is a choice; it seems hard to understand how anyone can choose not to default on their credit and make cuts if credit is used to fund mortgage, energy bills, things one "needs" to survive or stay in business. Many people and business go bankrupt for this reason when they cannot borrow more money to pay expenses. So I don't see the choice to "cut" as trivial.
zithen2 7 months ago
THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THE DEBT IS TO PRINT US TREASURY NOTES BACK BY PRECIOUS METALS. Federal reserve notes are debt based.
Mr2wings 7 months ago
BOTTOM LINE IS WE ARE GOING TO DEFAULT ANYWAY!!! SOME HOW PEOPLE ARE BRAIN-WASHED INTO THINKING THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO KEEP A 5 STAR CREDIT RATING, AND WE HAVE TO PAAAYYY OUR BIIIIILLLLLLLS.. CAUSE WE ARE A RESPOOOOONCIBLE NATION ... BAAA BAAAAAAAA
TheSteve4200 7 months ago
The economic collapse was not a mistake, but a plan
cezz505 7 months ago
you made some great points in this video.
TheUnmaskedMagician 7 months ago
Spot on. One of your best vids ever!
javabarbarian 7 months ago
I agree with most of what your saying but I have no sympathy for the extremely wealthy power mongers who use their money to write special interest laws and tax codes that let them escape their responsibility for paying and thus need for controlling their gov'ts spending. It's no secret that money controls and runs our gov't and it is/was their responsibility to not only reduce their share of the responsibility but stand up for a financially responsible gov't. They didn't and the bill is now due
Teyec00n 7 months ago
These guy should have retaken econ101 in college, but they were probably sleeping in class - snoring even. Well, here we are. FOLKS, we got no money.
paxout 7 months ago
There will be no cuts. The masses have spoken. They want government spending. Get your benefits ASAP. Socialism is in.
scottrex33 7 months ago
behead the serpent.
lucifuehrer 7 months ago
Debt ceiling debate is simple gamesmanship - Neither party wants to be left holding the American austerity bag going into an election cycle in 2012 - Simple as that. Our government is ridiculous . Ron Paul 2012 !!
xtop23 7 months ago
A dollar spent by the government is a dollar taxed by tthe government. The only way to reduce taxes is to cut spending.
EdR77203 7 months ago
Obama took an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the US. He also took the oath to faithfully perform the duties of the office of the presidency. Defaulting on these duties are a failure to perform what he took the "Oath of Office" for. He has gone around our laws and rights nearly every time to get his agenda passed. Making laws through executive order. Now talking about being able to raise the ceiling without congress. In 2014 it will be ObamaCare he is trying to protect.
benshivd 7 months ago
US infrastructure is falling apart...roads need worked on, power lines need worked on, trash on the side of the road needs picked up, sidewalks need rebuilt...there are millions of jobs out there that need filled..so instead of "giving" people FREE welfare, unemployment and a vast amount of tax payer money...Make them work on these projects...the government is already paying someone...might as well get some work out of these people. I bet some (if not all) the handouts would stop then! Comments?
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg Unions will never allow that to happen. Using welfare recipients wont either. Once they do "real work" you have to pay them "real wages". Maybe you didn't know what 120% of poverty means. That is what they live on. Some persons would have you believe. Being on welfare is just one big free "Party in the PJ's". Which is farther from the truth. Imagine trying to house and feed a family of say 4 on what amounts to about $1000 a month including food.
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd That is what is wrong with this socialist country! I know people who would rather recive unemployment benifits then get a job....because you and I know....there ARE jobs out there! Ive seen people who dont look for jobs because the government is giving "FREE" money away...why should they have to work? A family of 4 (or anybody) should NEVER live beyond their means so when these types of problems arise they are not in huge trouble! But like I said....that is the problem with this ......
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg Collecting Unemployment is not welfare. Its apples and oranges. Unemployment insurance is paid by empolyers rather than extorted from taxpayers against their wills.. There IS a big difference. When the benefits are "extended" that means Employers' "premiums" increase. The subsides the states receive are a loan to be paid back. Not like welfare which is a handout or a grant and are not paid back.
benshivd 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg Are you retarded ?
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd Have I offended you in any way? Why are you offending me? Keep it clean and "grown up". Now tell me...what do you not like in my response? I feel this country is in the shit hole its in because of the hand outs to everybody from corporate banks to welfare recipiants who abuse the system. What is so "retarded" about that? Sounds like a valid point dont you think? prove me wrong!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@benshivd The quotes you have copied from me to me I stand firm on those quotes....We are in a shit hole now...dont you think its time for change? Get rid of Unions and make a change! We the people have the power to remove such organizations. How is it that its "socialism" to earn your unemployment check? How?? You talk but dont back it up! How is it socialism to make people work for their unemployment checks instead of sitting on their asses? You are the one who sounds mentaly ill pal!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg I never said unemployment is socialism. Its insurance paid by employers on their employees. Except when it is federally extended then it is a subsidy to the state, a loan. Its not free money. When you get laid off and the only job you find if at all. Is half the money than you made working. Or your unemployment may be more than you can now make. Your going to go with whats best.Your lack of knowledge of the difference in welfare and unemployment is clear.Try2 read b4 you bleed
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd Bro...Listen...PLEASE...its because of people not wanting to change a system that is broken that problems (like the one this country is in) will always exsist! Unemployment benifits are awesome...I think they are great, but if people are going to be sitting around for as long as 99 weeks (doing nothing)...why can they work for the checks? Picking up garbage on the side of the road, fixing bridges, getting atleast some training...people abuse the system because they dont have to.....
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@benshivd CONT...actually try to get a job! This system is so screwed up, we (the people) are the true government of the US, we should start makeing that a rule to get unemployment benifits...Hear me out...I know it sounds dumb, but like I said, the system is not working the way it is right now, so it wont hurt to change a few things and putting people to work for their checks is NOT a bad idea... The money has to come from somewhere, and weather it be insurance money, its still hurts the.....
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@benshivd CONT 2...hurts the country to be giving out so much money for nothing. Think about it for a minute...Where is all that money coming from? Its not coming out of thin air...the Fed still has to print it and thus making the dollar even more worthless....So why not make the recipients earn their check? I would do it in a heart beat....wouldnt you? Wouldnt any America loving citizen? I think they would....its a good idea that should be talked about! Thats all Im saying!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@benshivd CONT....country we want things to get fixed (our economy, our money problems, wars and everything) but nobody wants to change or sqeeze their belts a little! I mean come on....can you actually say all people on welfare really need it? What if the government did stop these welfare programs, do you really think all these people would just die? I think they would do anything in their power to survive! (and that means getting a job). If America wants change, we gotta allow it to happen!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg If welfare stopped tomorrow. Some would try and get a job sure. but with the market the way it is.There will be riots, robberies, looting. An overall increase of crime. AKA Greece , Ireland? When you are held on the edge of poverty and have little to loose. It takes only a very small spark to ignite a huge firestorm. Personally i think this is exactly the plan. "Cant let a good disaster go to waste" right Rom ?
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd Rom?? Nah, Come on...those who go look for a job, will get a job...those who dont find a job can work for the government doing the infrastructure jobs that I mentioned...Do you really think they are going to give a damn about "unions" or "real work and real wages"? Hell no, their first goal is to survive! I mean if we are to turn this country around we gotta turn things around. "In order for Evil and destruction to flourish, all that is required is for good men to do nothing! Ed Burk.
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg Yeah i mean Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff. wwwyoutubecom/watch?v=1yeA_kHHLow .Did you know 80 % of all the supposed stimulus funds went to unions? We all know they need to completely tear down our Free Market Republic to usher in a Socialist Society. We dont want MORE reliance on government.For the last couple decades especially our children Have been taught in school its ok to not work for what you need. You will be owed your fair share. There are no loosers etc
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd Welfare and food stamps do not exsist in a free market capitalistic economy, there is no such thing as an intitlement...No one is entitled to anything! Such programs are socialistic and communistic not capitalistic! Further more such programs have proven to be disasterous even in socialistic and communistic ecomonies which are specifically designed for such things. To think that such programs could be sucessful in a capitalistic economy is plain stupid!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@benshivd Cont.. You and I have NO obligation to aid others when it is other peoples responibilities to fend for themselves. Such things are not the responsibilites of the federal or state government...its personal responsiblities! In a capital country state that if you dont work, you dont eat! plain and simple! Welfare and food stamps encourage irresponsible behavior and offer an incentve to not work, to not take care of yourself and be lazy! Social welfare should be left to the private sector!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago 2
@benshivd Cont 2... There are charities, church groups, community services that can handle such issues. If the person is such a lazy pile of shit that the persons family, friends and neighbors are unwilling to help in a time of need...then the person should starve to death. If your friends and family dont care about you...why should I? It is unethical and unjust to expect to anyone should be forced to give you anything...if you want something...then you earn it!
LetsgetphysicalAg 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg QUOTE :"those who dont find a job can work for the government doing the infrastructure jobs that I mentioned" Thats socialism right there. QUOTE: ".Do you really think they are going to give a damn about "unions" or "real work and real wages"? They dont really have much of a choice they are the most organised at the moment. Thats who got almost all of the stimulus and along with acorn got Obama elected. With the disenfranchised republican voters looking for "change"
benshivd 7 months ago
@LetsgetphysicalAg Unemployment is paid by the Employer to the state. The Employee pays for it already by sweat equity. Since you have to work a set amount of time to even qualify for unemployment. You need to stop lumping unemployment with welfare. They are nothing alike Welfare is a grant you get with almost no obligation.Unemployment you earn by working x amount of hours. As far as sitting around collecting unemployment. I have no problem with it. They earned that right. But not for 99 weeks.
benshivd 7 months ago
oh and by the way...the wars that the poor are paying for is making your rich worshippees richer....war=money for corporations
mikespacelive 7 months ago
i have to argue with the fact that the rich pay so much in taxes...they pay much less because they have the best accountants that find loopholes to where they actually get tax credits...alot of what you say is sound but that argument i just mentioned is based on teabagger talking points
mikespacelive 7 months ago
The bank would just let them live in it payment free if the property taxes were cheaper than book to real market value.
JimbobOMG 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please tell me what's wrong with going back to the Clinton era tax rates on the rich and corporations?
Cettywise 7 months ago
People say "the creditors, the creditors" Who are these creditors!???!?!?! THE FED?
Riddlerx333x 7 months ago
@Riddlerx333x Anyone who owns a treasury, so the FED, China, and many others including U.S. citizens.
visionvictory 7 months ago
@visionvictory
Why don't you have the balls to mention the truth GDP number, 1,5 % growth, my ass.
kennjohnsen 7 months ago
@Riddlerx333x The Fed isn't buying all of the debt, but they are buying a lot of it. Many of these bondbuyers are selling the Tsy's back to the Fed, but some are not.
joepeeler34 7 months ago
True the US government does take in enough wealth to pay the interest on the national debt. But only by say: "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" The money the US takes in every month is committed to several causes . China ,Japan ,Middle East etc.. can only be payed if other obligations are ignored and not paid.
These people who are no longer receiving money ,will become extremely angry as a result & massive social unrest in the USA will occur.
MOONKNIGHT2007 7 months ago
You were one of those guys with the NIA right? You left though rite cuz they're scammers? Anyway I really WANT THE DEBT CEILING TO REMAIN so the chaos they think will happen CAN. America is BS and I'm tired of working for corporate scum bags
dreamslides 7 months ago
Oligarichs control the Rating Agencies, ie Moody's is controlled by Warren Buffett.
CrooksWithoutBorders 7 months ago
For the first time in history Bush fought wars on tax cuts. That's the problem, someone has to pay for these wars. Whose it going to be if it's not the American people? Where is the money coming from? If you are going to fight wars you have to pay and the way to pay is in taxes.
movieklump 7 months ago 5
@movieklump Bush fought his wars on Borrowed money. Even still his debt pales in comparison in his 8 years to the historical debt in 2.5 years of Obama. This administration has more debt than ALL the the other administrations combined in our history. Projected 20 trillion by 2014 now.
benshivd 7 months ago
@benshivd Debt begets debt. Obama took over after the 2008 debacle with unemployment on the rise. The system was broken. He tied in vain to inject funds into the economy to save jobs. Bush was an idiot. He gave Obama nothing but a wrecked economy. Would the Austrian strategy have worked with the huge unemployment and lost savings from destroyed banks? I think not. It's only advocate Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution so he obviously has a flawed reason and no chance to win.
movieklump 7 months ago
@movieklump OMG its Bush's fault. Have you heard of the Fair Housing act ? Started by Carter and continued by Clinton. Then Strictly enforced when congress was taken over by the Dems in 2006. Which FORCED banks to make loans to people that could not afford them ? Look it up. The banks answer was sub-prime loans. Which yes were allowed by the LACK of regulation on Bush's part. So yes he is partly to blame. Barney Frank , Geightner and those that ran Fanny and Freddy did the rest.Dont be a retard
benshivd 7 months ago
@movieklump NO, you cut some of the foreign aid and these bullshit "entitlement" programs. There have to be cuts, people getting checks for free will have to buy store brands and do the cutting back that working families are having to make.
vambo13257 7 months ago
@vambo13257 Why blame the most unfortunate in society for the mistakes/greed of the oligarchs. The US spends more jails than they do on entitlement programs. But if you cut entitlement programs you will need more jails because families will be desperate. How do you feed your family if there are no jobs? It costs more to put someone in jail than it does to give them entitlements. The US already has more incarcerated people than any other country.
movieklump 7 months ago
@movieklump Did I say anything about jails? What the hell are you talking about? Most of the "unfortunate" are "unfortunate" either by their own doing or by being stuck on the hind tit of society by liberal do-gooders like yourself!
vambo13257 7 months ago
@vambo13257 If a family can't get a job or unemployment how are they going to eat? They either starve or steal and if they steal they go to jail. Can't you see the connection? Do you maintain that the real figure of 19 per cent unemployment in America is the fault of 1 in 5 Americans? If so I would immigrate to better country like China were the company making Apple Ipads has had 15 suicides this year due to working conditions.
movieklump 7 months ago
The problems our country faces today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
DRationalOne 7 months ago 14
@DRationalOne Very Very good point. Plus, the amount of people sucking from the system already is like spotting "more of the same" politicians 30% of the vote every time.
visionvictory 7 months ago 2
@DRationalOne Kind of right there.
benshivd 7 months ago
Dude, they've already chosen not to pay the creditors. For if they did, there would be no more debt!
rad4life1 7 months ago
The invidious cowards who inhabit Washington are unwilling to restructure the largest banks and GSEs [government sponsored enterprises, like Fannie and Freddie]. The reluctance comes partly from what truths restructuring will reveal. As a result, these same large zombie banks and the U.S. economy will continue to shrink under the weight of bad debt, public and private. Remember that the Dodd-Frank legislation was not so much about financial reform as protecting the housing GSEs.
savgal1211 7 months ago
BoA Sux
DRandomD 7 months ago
The thing that annoys me the most is that this dumbass employees say "tax the rich". Who do you think is going to get screwed in that transaction? The rich are who provide jobs not the poor. So if they are taxed more your forcing them to cut their expenses to pay the tax. They are still going to keep everything they have with the only difference that all these poor employees are going to be jobless because THEY wanted to tax the rich. Come people get educated, and stop being parrots!!
argentino10940 7 months ago
@Sorry but the Rich GOT there in Large part by EVADING their "Fair Share" of Taxes! BUY OFF A Few Legislators and get HUGE tax breaks to move your manufacturing "offshore"?! Talk about screwing workers - - Twice!
Meanwhile, the "capitalists" enjoy private jets, Luxury SUVs, 2nd homes & other "business" expenses at tax DISCOUNTS - while the workers who actually CREATE the Wealth are SUBSIDIZING them!
What we need is PUBLICLY Funded elections so that the privileged can't BUY Lawmakers!
MzProgressive 7 months ago
@argentino10940 You should show them "Eat the Rich" watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ Something everyone should watch.
Ron Paul 2012!!
1776Rosco 7 months ago
they own and license the media, so the outcome of any disaster is always too much freedom for the slaves and too little power for the rulers. If the media would stop to play ball, bad things would happen to them.
Reality can not be beaten, however. The crisis will continue, no matter if they make people take it with a smile.
modelmark 7 months ago
here in the uk if you earn over £150k then you pay 50% tax. that's on top of the 20% VAT and council tax etc. i'm sick and tired of governments spend spend spending....thats why the world is in so much problems...scum-sucking socialists!!!
TheMunkmeister 7 months ago
I think it is insane that some politicians in Washington want to raise revenue by increase taxes and not by nurturing renewed manufacturing. If America were to start producing more of the goods we purchase like tennis shoes, clothing, cell phones, power tools, etc. perhaps the increased employment would provide additional earned revenue.
Also, a constitutional mandate should be put into place that requires a reduction of Washington's debt by 10% of GDP per year until it is paid off.
nvsyru 7 months ago
here is the problem with your logic. government is not a household or a business. if a middle class household is making $2200 a month and spending $3700, but have a billion dollar credit line, that is sustainable for a very long time.
DonPaulPro 7 months ago
low rent sounds nice, how about fuck the bank bailouts and make them all 'correct', well it might be too late .....buy more silver.....wtf, i been tellin my aunt to sell her shit extra car and buy silver so she can have a chance, so she makes up lame ass excuses like it's hard to store it at home....and then she talked to an old friend who 'did' silver yrs ago....lol....why listen to the guy who missed adding a zero to his investment, maybe he could be helping out his kids that are 5 to a room.
bodyheals 7 months ago
US dollar ? . You cant polish a turd.
dynomike1964 7 months ago
THEY WILL CUT THEIR GRANDMOTHER'S OWN SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK BEFORE THEY CUT SPENDING FOR THEIR TRILLION DOLLAR WARS!
markymarkuss777 7 months ago
It doe's not matter. The US will always be in debt. QE3 will come than QE4 ans so on. America will go on. We will just pay more. That is the bottom line.
Yes, the US has it's problems, but I would not want to live any where else in the world.
loveguitars 7 months ago
Ignorance is bliss.
NIK4EVA 7 months ago
You are incorrect, a bankrupt and jobless US cannot pay off its debt . The governments current income is a byproduct of an economy stimulated by debt. Remove that stimulation and the governments income will shrink to earnings derived from taxing exports - 30% of 1.2T.
LivCheaplyAndProsper 7 months ago
Comment removed
LivCheaplyAndProsper 7 months ago
@LivCheaplyAndProsper I was only speaking about the actual debt interest payments, I agree, the US can not and will never pay off its debt. You bring up a great point about how US income would collapse without the ponzi scheme of government paying people/injecting money into the economy and then collecting taxes on their income and transactions.
thx for the comments
visionvictory 7 months ago
@LivCheaplyAndProsper we will pay our debt the same way Greece is going to. Sell off all national interests.
darbone 7 months ago
@darbone Another factoid for you. Speaking of "Assets". Did you know, through Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. The government are the underwriters to nearly 95% of ALL mortgages in the US? Default or otherwise. That means what we denied allowing them to take our land. Violating our property rights. Through eminent domain laws etc. for centuries. Yet in less than a decade. We have just handed or property and our rights along with it right over to them.
benshivd 7 months ago
@darbone, Sell to who?, all countries are in debt. Governments and people have been burrowing from banks that didn't have the wealth. The worlds economy has blue screened in a divide by zero error.
LivCheaplyAndProsper 7 months ago
An ex-CIA agent has went public and stated that the 2012 election has already been decided..... Obama will be the winner. And there will not be another president after him. Don't shoot the messenger.
mcap52 7 months ago
There will be NO cuts. Daniel and I both know this. They are talking out of both sides of their ass which they refer to as their mouth. IMO the rich the poor and the middle class should all pay the same percentage of Income tax. Everyone contribute 20% or any number you chose of their income as tax. That is the only truly FAIR way to pay income tax. Everyone pays the same percentage of their wages. One guy paying 35% while one pays 15% is so unfair its ridiculous.
feud1111 7 months ago
did not these Credit rating companies rate the sub-prime mortages as AAA?
BTinHD 7 months ago
Great video...very educational
seller559 7 months ago
If they don't raise the debt ceiling, they will default to cutting spending.
jjenson2006 7 months ago
Full Blown Economic Depression by 2014. They'll be talking about the causes many years from now and they will blame the housing crises.
projectdurden 7 months ago
Remember, buffet said he pays less taxes than his secretary ! the rich have too many friends in the government that allows them not to pay there fair share , on a regular basis ! not right.
RESISTCONTROL2 7 months ago
@RESISTCONTROL2 Friends like Obama
rallycsx 7 months ago
The best credit rating is an interest rate set by the free market.
When a creditor and a lender agree on their own interest rates, that rate is what the market determined as the risk of lending to that particular borrower.
There's a good reason we should be worried about rising interest rates. It would imply that demand for our debt has gone down. The demand for our debt is our credit rating.
TheMetalPerson 7 months ago
The rent needs to come down actually. The current condition is insane. 48122 Melvindale Mi, you can buy a 2br house for under 20k. But if you own it, the government will give you $762 a month for section 8 housing. So again the middle class suffers. Credit scores and down payments wont allow them to buy the house, and they can't afford to rent it because tax dollars are jacking up the cost. The free market should determine rental value, not section 8 stats.
neiscius 7 months ago
Wow..nicely said...you nailed it.
AccuracyMarked 7 months ago
If the government voluntarily defaults on the national debt and its Treasury Bonds, it is patently illegal and unconstitutional. I will absolutely hound my Congressmen and Senators to impeach this president and imprison Geithner and Bernanke. A few days ago former president Bill Clinton stated that if it were up to him, he would use the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the national debt ceiling and let the courts try to reverse it. These people are monstrous vampiric ghouls.
yhird 7 months ago
The ULTRA RICH hide their money in Foundation/Trust and pull out the minimum and donate the minimum amount and are taxed at the lowest rate. Name one Ultra rich who is NOT in a Foundation..................Zero. Charity my ass!
Pfsif 7 months ago
I like how the Democrats, who didn't propose the 2010 budget, are now THE BUDGET CUTTERS after voting for all his failure. Pity so few cannot discern the truth that Obama still has 44% of people who think this guy is doing something responsible. When Obama says he's fighting, who is he fighting against? The middle Class?
emmy1cat 7 months ago
I just don't know, when they sign this packaged deal when Bush was in office they put a lot of time and money and claim the package should last till 2014. This just seems like a political reason. Republicans didn't even bother to do a economic impact it would be to make the trillions of tax cuts they request for. I say wait till 2014. But, always be on high alert, politics come and go.
quakepapi 7 months ago
Who exactly pays for your War machine if no one gets taxed?
Goldsovereignuk 7 months ago
@Goldsovereignuk the rest of the world pays through the dollar scam
sanctiX 7 months ago
@sanctiX Clearly not when you have to make cuts at home.
Goldsovereignuk 7 months ago
mmhuh
MathewsWire 7 months ago