Haaaaa..... join the club asshole.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59706.html

I don't think we ever elect people to cooperate. We elect people to "go to Washington and get the job done." To fight for our ideas over those of others. Mostly, we send people off to the District and hope (assume?) that they will cooperate once they arrive.

It's difficult in times like these, full of hardship and change, to watch politics with the right sized grain of salt -- not so cynical that you don't vote or participate (because then they won; and, besides, this is our country, not theirs -- it's theirs only in so far as they're one of us), but not so invested that you go up and down with the emotional rollercoaster (because then you just die early of stress, and your life is defined by someone else's bullshit.)

I think a lot of this has to do with the fundamental disconnect between politics and governance. As above, they care more about power and their position than we like to think: sometimes, like with the debt ceiling brinksmanship, you get to see it:

And that, really, is the grain of salt that I'm coming to prefer: They all lie; they're all corrupt; it's only about power and money; good things get done for everyone else only as a means to more money and power; but vote anyway.

quotes from here: http://www.gnomanomics.com/2011/07/u...are-two.html):

gvidas, I agree with much of your statements, but if their politics had little to no effect on my life I would agree whole heartedly, but nice post anyway....

Government is too big, too bloated, and an inefficient user of my tax dollars.

I agree, it is big, bloated, and inefficient. But probably the govt waste that bothers me is different from what bothers you. Massive government spending in the past has done amazing things: the interstate system is kind of mind blowing. NASA was cool. I want a new electric grid and nationwide high-speed rail, but that's never going to happen as a private venture.

I like the summary of the US as "an insurance company with an army": http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...insurance.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...hinsurance.png


But the root of that distribution isn't, to my eyes, the people we elect. It's the fact that we have given corporations an insane amount of power. There are countless instances of relatively reasonable people, when in a group, doing horrible things. A layer of abstraction between them and the results; shared responsibility; and it trickles down to "just following orders." I think corporations quickly get there. They tend to be evil simply because they lack basic moral sensibility.

So, yes, reign in the government; cut spending; get out of our homes and our personal lives. But the solution there is to stop pharmaceutical companies from defining how we view health, healing, and medicine; and to stop the defense industry from defining how we view the world.

I'm not saying that to suggest any grand conspiracy. To my eyes it's a natural product of a free market: there's no incentive to make healthcare efficient and affordable. There's no incentive to hold a reasoned view of the actual military threats that exist in the world, or how to fight them.

People with money will use that money to get more money. Pharm and defense are two massive industries, and it only makes sense that they will do what they can to continue to grow.

But it is. Because those we have elected are tied directly to the power of the corporations. Certainly you can see that. It is about power on behalf of the individual politico, including Obama, and power on behalf of the corps or unions or special interest groups. No party is immune. I would say 80% are whores of special interest groups. 10% on either side are in it for real change for the better of the nation of the whole. The problem is that those 20% will never make the changes needed.

We are Fucked.

Quick question friends--

do you think whatever deal is made about the debt ceiling/deficit reduction... do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing to make one that is so short that we'll need to do this process again before the 2012 elections?

Extremely bad. It will just be a partisan bloodbath that doesn't accomplish anything and will make the election process unbearable to anyone in the middle. I honestly think it would be best to make so the next debt ceiling vote has to happen about three months into the presidential term.

I agree, extremely bad. I think those in favor of such a plan, namely Boehner and his group, are maneuvering strictly for political advantage. "The crisis atmosphere *he* created will be avoided." "The truth is, the President wants a blank check today." Are you kidding.

Please, stop being so shallow.

I liked "He wouldn't take yes for an answer":rolleyes:

I just wrote to my congressman. One Honorable John Boehner.

It'll be hard to read it with all the posturing he's doing. :rolleyes:

Here you go:

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

writing is great and all, but they don't really spend much time reading those things. To really make them pay attention, a phone call is much more effective, because the staff will have to spend actual time on the phone call. They can't just quickly skim it and do the automated computerized response.

I don't do telephones.

Perhaps even better I show up on his doorstep?

Not heard of one person here who's actually bothered with anything but whining here...but I'll keep in mind how ineffective my effort is, next time.

Thanks.

That's an impressively wide and sweeping insult to all concerned.

Just returning the favor.

Same old...

One thing I don't understand (well I do understand if I am going to be cynical...) about Republicans logic on tax increases is that spending cuts are going to hurt the economy as well. If significant spending cuts are going to be made, that means there will be people that will need to survive on less money than they had before and there will be more people competing for jobs. This will ultimately mean that people will spend less, which, at least from what I understand, is extremely bad for the economy in a recession. Sure if we lower taxes we can increases investment but if no one will buy anything it really doesn't do anything....

The biggest difference I see from tax increases and spending cuts is who will hurt the most. In general, tax increases will hurt wealthier Americans, whatever wealthier Americans mean, and generally, spending cuts will hurt poorer Americans. So it doesn't take much thinking to realize that either Republicans are completely disillusion or they are willing to hurt the economy, but as long as it is on their terms.


Also, just to throw this out there. Taxes =/= Incomes Taxes. The bottom 50% do pay taxes.

Shallow? that's not shallow, that's an outright lie. I understand the issues with different philosophies and all, but this is past the point of anything even remotely rational.
THEY (virtually all of them) are playing politics with this and as usual, we the people are the ones paying for their decisions.

whew! thank goodness. I just heard that Michelle Bachman will not vote for Boehner's plan, this two step baloney.

wait--there's more--oh, great. She further says that she will not vote for *any* bill that raises the debt ceiling. Poor Boehner, this is what he has to work with. We're fucked.

OMFG. . .

Just wait until Obama starts placing the National Guard on alert on Aug 2nd. That should get everyone's attention.

I wrote my Representative and one Senator two weeks ago.

That is a much better answer. Good on you. :)

Until he realizes he might not be able to pay them. :eek:

I only wander though this thread occasionally, so maybe this was mentioned already, but ...

There is a last resort.

Print cash.

It staves off insolvency for a while. In fact, since US debt is denominated in US dollars, it will mean your debt represents a smaller and smaller percentage of your GDP.

Problem is, it also causes devaluation and possibly hyperinflation. Anyone with cash in the bank, cash under the bed, or an income fixed in dollar amounts, will find their position somewhere between eroded and vapourised.

this is exactly what china has complained about already

they say they've lost hundreds of billions of dollars in value of their investments due to the dilution of the dollar by the quantitative easing programs. programs that literally just printed money.

keep trying please. we need all the ideas we can get, and you can't possibly be less informed than some members of congress, despite your merely occasional visits here.

China? #$%@ 'em.

Their practice of pegging the RMB to an artificially low rate against the US$ is the cause of about 1/4 of the US's problems. The fact that a US devaluation would screw China and OPEC is about the strongest argument in favour of it that I can think of.

China complaining about other countries messing about with currency games? Hypocrisy! That's rich. No, wait, its China that's rich.

I agree completely.

Unfortunately, I (the corporate/royal/national I) still have a problem.

Nixon and Ford did that. As a result, the dollar dropped to almost one fifth of its value. Stagflation. Eventually, Jimmy Carter and Greenspan did what was necessary to fix the problem. Interest rates approaching 20%. Wholesale selling of American assets - most of Hawaii, major NYC real estate, construction equipment, bankruptcies, massive unemployment, sell off everything inside factories, etc. It fixed the problem but cost Carter his job. And did not finish fixing until the second half of Reagan's first term.

We have a fundamental problem traceable to when these debts were incurred. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." So Cheney had no problem spending money we did not have - just like Nixon. Nixon did it in 1968/70. Cheney did it starting in 2001. Therefore jobs and recession happened in 1975/79. And 2008/now. We are simply paying for the debts incurred back then. Do you also want to bring back stagflation? We are in far better shape than we should have been.

Debts created by Cheney/George Jr are much larger. And continue to exist due to Mission Accomplished and their protection of bin Laden. Whereas Carter was not incurring new debts. Obama is stuck with wacko extremist created disaster including Afghanistan, a completely screwed up space program, a military that is sucking the life out of America, and the 'enrich the drug companies' prescription drug plan that by itself is another $1trillion. Add to it so many wacko extremists in Congress that we cannot even do the simplest things - eliminate the paper dollar bill – an immediate $1billion saved annually.

So you want to print more paper money? That was already done by George Jr when we flew three 747s with pallets of hundred dollar bills into Iraqi (with no accounting) to ‘save’ that country. Time to pay for all that printed money is now.

Now is when all those debts start coming due. It is rather amazing that our unemployment did not exceed 20%. Maybe because this time we did not print more money.

We could sell Minnesota, if anyone would buy it.

I resent that. Wisconsin is a much better choice.

Well, how about if we tack on North and South Dakota?

Does the Minot Nuclear bomber base go with them?

Nobody needs a nuclear non-proliferation treaty any more. Balance the budget at all costs.

Here is a great link:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Obama's goal to make it go to 2013 at least is political posturing completely on his part. I would like to see a plan that goes out 10 or 20 years and ties it to a balanced budget amendment and a total revamping of the tax code, much like the gang of 6 designed.

Minnesota would get rid of Michelle Bachmann, too.;)

Politicians who throw around the idea of constitutional amendments lose major points in my book. It's virtually impossible to amend the Constitution. It's not just an act of congress signed into law by the president, it requires 2/3s majority in BOTH houses and then goes to the individual states and must clear through 3/4s of them. That's 38 states that each have to approve the proposed amendment. It isn't easy. The equal rights amendment never made it through. Anything that is remotely political isn't going to make it. For example, think of the political climate in Arizona and the political climate in Massachusetts. There aren't too many issues that both states are going to get behind. That's the divide you have to bridge.

Politicians who talk about Constitutional amendments are just full of shit.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that they are "full of shit", well at least no more than the rest of them and Obama, now if you said they were all pretty much "full of shit", I would agree with you completely. The idea that we can't figure out a way to mandate a balanced budget through some process or the other does not mean that we can't explore ideas to address, this is just another idea in my book. But if this thing fails I predict Obama and a host of other politicans, both R's and D's, are going to go down in flames come 2012, as they should.

The problem is, when we dropkick them to the curb, are we going to end up with a bunch of fire-and-brimstone, punt women back to the stone age, elitist nutballs in power instead? Are there any actual sane people running for office? If not sane, then maybe ones that use actual facts to base their decisions on? Instead of deliberately skewing statistics by comparing apples to monkey balls?

I'm sick of the whole lot of them and that's saying a whole lot.

Well..... how does that differ from having the other extreme? Don't the voters make that decision?

Huh? :eyebrow:


I repeat, are there any sane people running for office...so the VOTERS CAN MAKE THE DECISION....?

Spexxxx - were those R or D congresses?
redo and resubmit please & thanks.

You could always sell Alaska back to the Russkies.

If you're that interested, do the leg work yourself. Bottom line is that the POTUS signed the bills into law.

Here, I just remembered that I have this bookmarked, for just such an emergency. Emergency, I say, boy!

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgov...division_2.htm

Correlate and draw causational conclusions at your leisure.

Thanks - I remember you (someone) posting that somewhere...
Quick glance looks like it was vastly a D majority in both the house and senate for most of them.

Sorry your quote:

sounds like a common rant about repulickin right-wing nuts... If that is not the case, my bad. If that is the case, again, how does that differ from the other extreme?

Huh. The House was gonna vote today on Boehner's proposed bill, but now they're not. My estimation is that the majority has not secured 218 votes, so no vote... yet. Is it not time to, you know, get some shit done yet? Gaaaaawwwd.

Because the biggest complaints about the left is that they want to give too many rights. Right to gay marriage, etc....

So far the extreme right is about taking away rights. The dumbest proposal I've heard from friends is making property ownership a requirement for voting. Then there is the attempt to redefine the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. Add to that various attempts to make it more difficult to register voters, etc.

I bet if the people started to build a guillotine in Washington some shit would get done.

A dickhead separated from it's body is still a dickhead.:mad:

I know, that's funny from a guy named Richard.:right:

True, but it's a less effective dickhead. Much, much less effective. And it's a message to the other dickheads. Sometimes all you need is one good visual.

I've been watching this 'debt ceiling' issue unfold from over the pond, and I think I probably can speak for a good proportion of my fellow Brits when I ask, wtf is your government doing?

How can this level of brinksmanship possibly still be going on, this close to crisis?

Speaking from this side of the pond, I can tell you that we have no fucking idea what the government is doing. They are scaring me.

Tea party Republicans are openly telling reporters that a government default is acceptable. Not a problem. They want more tax cuts to the rich. And more spending cuts to protect existing government welfare. This will only harm others who actually make jobs. And any organization dependent on cash flow.

Tax cuts for the past decade have only destroyed jobs. Undermined the economy. The extremist agenda of 2000 George Jr created our economic problems. Wacko extremist even said, “Reagan proved that deficits do not matter.” The political agenda even forgets that defined their philosophy.

George Jr wacko extremist spending made necessary massive government stimulus to avert a great depression. And still, these wacko extremists want to do more welfare for the rich. Refuse to admit the economic policies that created these debts. These debts are the bills, created four and eight years ago, now coming due. What is their solution? Keep doing what made the problem as if tax cuts and defaults are good. And now, default. They will probably blame the Chinese who hold over $1trillion in US government debt. Debt that was created by lies including Mission Accomplished. Debts we still have not yet paid for.

International observers have no idea how constant the wacko extremist rhetoric is on radio and Fox News. Only the least educated would listen. But that is also how Hitler came to power. Disparage the educated. Mock facts. Promote hate. Brainwashing by soundbytes.

Glen Beck associated a Labor Party summer outing in Norway with Nazi party youth camps. Those who find default acceptable also praise and respect Glen Beck. Do those outside America have any idea how acceptable that is to so many Fox News viewers? Tea party Republicans think a default is good or acceptable. Their political agenda (and the hate that empowers that political agenda) is more important.

Boehner is too liberal for the Tea Party. These people are that wacko extremist. That routinely manipulated by Limbaugh logic.

If a guillotine was built, the Tea Party would praise the accomplishment. Another example of hate that empowers extremists at the expense of moderates and rational thought.

I agree with tw. except his last two sentences. The guillotine remark was tongue-in-cheek, you humorless man. Try, won't you, to grow a sense of humor and you may live longer.


Not that I care.

Maybe you thought it was humor. Nearby Tea Party members are now considering it. When the guillotine begins operation, it will be your fault. But first they must finish creating a default. They want Obama (and America) to fail. Then! off with their heads.

:rolleyes:

I still don't know wtf they are doing. They are acting crazy, absurd.

Politics at play all the way, especially where a graduated debt ceiling level verses a fully raised debt ceiling is concerned. Then tax cuts, caps and the 2012 elections.

What better way to get what you want than by playing brinkmanship. Just hold the U.S. credit rating over the chasm by a thread and watch people start screaming. Sick fucks.


It scares me that social security benefits are in the general fund and not in a trust fund. It scares me that my parents are threatened by not getting the income they paid into, not to mention what I and others have paid into for years.

I have read the worse case scenario would be, if an agreement isn't reached the people who get paid are military personnel, interest holders and social security recipients.

I don't believe what I read anymore though so who knows.

hmmm... but it does reduce the quorum.

I tell you what is surprising from my perspective, is that your system doesn't seem to actually place a great deal of power into the hands of the President.

Well...not a black President.

:rolleyes: