We are broke!
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown Community
Forum Name: Middletown News, Info and Happenings
Forum Description: Discuss any Middletown Ohio area news story.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=541
Printed Date: Nov 22 2024 at 1:13am
Topic: We are broke!
Posted By: .308
Subject: We are broke!
Date Posted: Sep 05 2008 at 2:08pm
|
Broke Broke Broke!
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html - http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html
I mention this because I am tired of hearing people argue about which candidate for president will do more to "help" everyone out with this problem or that problem. I think people would be a lot better off if they understood the implications of our debt and simply told the politicians: "With help like this no thank you". |
Replies:
Posted By: John Beagle
Date Posted: Sep 05 2008 at 3:03pm
Debt Clock
refresh to see numbers go up. ------------- http://www.johnbeagle.com/" rel="nofollow - John Beagle Middletown USA News of, for and by the people of Middletown, Ohio. |
Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Sep 05 2008 at 4:27pm
|
I just called my dad to see how he was doing. I just wanted to say hi but all he wanted to do was complain about the Republicans, the cost of his meds, and trying to live on Social Security. (Even though he is quite well off and has a nice pension and benefits from his 30 years with IBM) When asked where the money was suppose to come from to in order to better fund these programs he had nothing. He just kept blaming Bush and tried to tell me that we had a surplus under Clinton, which is total fiction as far as I know.
Just sad he has fallen into that mindset. |
Posted By: swohio75
Date Posted: Sep 06 2008 at 9:18am
|
I know people who are voting for Obama because the country was so good under the Clinton years.
I said, what makes you think that Obama is anything like Clinton? Then I remind them of Jimmy Carter's term as President and what the county was like. |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Sep 06 2008 at 10:07am
| Actually- pre Bush, the economy was stronger, there was no war, my stock portfolio was growing at a much faster pace, there were more viable jobs to select from,unemployment was lower, our world reputation and status was stronger, money seemed to be flowing, you could fill your tank for under $40., you could actually walk out of the grocery store with 4 bags for under a $100.00,more people could afford to take a vacation, businesses weren't going under at such a rapid pace, more people could afford to dine out, Family Dollar/ Odd Lots were still considered cheap discount stores whereas, today, they have become the only stores that people can afford, illegal immigration wasn't advertised as being the monster problem that it is today, the country wasn't close to being in the debt that it is now in and the feeling of hopelessness wasn't so prevelent. Now, after almost 8 years of Bush's administration(yes, he's in charge, it's ok to blame him for things) and a Republican controlled Congress for 6 of the 8 years, we have what you see now. Was dad really that wrong to think that?He's frustrated. Alot of us are.Clinton had his issues too. He certainly wasn't without blame also. If you're going to blame Clinton for the many things that Repubs like to blame him for, to be truely objective about this, you must throw some flak Bush's way.Let's mention some of Bush's inadequacies also. Or, is he infallable? Fair enough? Oh, you wrote "money that was suppose to come from in order to better fund these programs"- by "these programs" you must mean the Iraq war which is a major contributor to this debt. |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Sep 06 2008 at 10:23am
| Yep- Carter was the nice old grandpa type, not Presidential material.Definite Democratic Party cluster. While mentioning the Carter years, mention the Reagan years when he changed the landscape of the workplace in the 80's when he removed many of the worker's rights and the ability to show displeasure with management without paying the price. The workers voice in the workplace was reduced by Reagan. (and no, I've never been affiliated with a union.) |
Posted By: Tazman
Date Posted: Sep 06 2008 at 10:33am
|
As much as I would never jump to defend Reagen or any of the others-it isn't just one person or administration or political party that has gotten us into this mess. We like to think that with a new administration that we will get change. Not as long as PACs, Lobbyists, Corporate America and the old time staffers have more clout with the people setting the policies and spending the money than the American people as a whole.
If you the history check on key people, you'll see just who has been around in Washington all the way back to the Reagen administration and how they have never been elected to a position---but have set the policy that has gotten us where we are. |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Sep 07 2008 at 8:22am
| You're right Tazman. PAC/lobbyists money is the real influential power in Washington. Did you see the segments on the parties put on by special interest groups for candidates of both parties.( It was comical watching John Boehner try to dance at one of them) Bill Maher had a guy on his show that did a segment on that subject. Obama and McCain both said that the PAC/lobbyists influence was going to be reduced this time, but I can see by the news stories that that will not happen. All of these politician clowns will sell their soul to the groups with the most money. Corrupt and disgusting- both parties.Problem is- when you exercise your right to vote, and you're voting for change, the outcome never changes- "Joe Average" citizen never gets the better end of the stick. Rich people, corporations and special interests always win. My family votes but the question is- why, when it will never favor the "regular" people?Exactly what do we all get out of voting that will ensure what the people want?Politicians- people you love to hate! |
Posted By: Ernie
Date Posted: Sep 08 2008 at 9:51am
| Wow...out of all that could of ran and to end up with these two. The one golden boy who is good at talking and has not ran nothing...not even a cub scout pack and the other who is ready to fall over at any time. A sad day for Americans. Either can say what they want but in all the years not one has ever complied with there campaining promiss. Pick a D or pick a R and its all about hoping for the best. So many arguments over a D and R. It's so sad to see educated people pick sides. It never has been so much a D or R but rather the circimstances the president was handed and had to deal with. There are good time and there are bad times. So keep the fires going, build them high because it it so easy to blame a D or R for the things we are facing as Americans. Most people are so caught up in the arguments over D and R and pointing fingers wanting to blame someone when all along we the people are to blame. Just a thought. |
Posted By: .308
Date Posted: Sep 08 2008 at 1:17pm
|
[
Ernie - True!!!!! The problem is that both parties have tried their best to give the people what they want. (The war in Iraq excluded). And that "policy" to be polite, or "scheme to get votes" to be more realistic, has for 40 years built up a giant deficit. Saying the economy was better under Clinton is fine, I would not argue. But I think the real problem is the mindset that would say a 5 Trillion Dollar Deficit (as existed under Clinton) was not all that bad. The deficit in the 90's was like a small hole in the haul of a big party boat. We were all having a good time on the cruise, but the boat was still sinking. On MainStreetMonroe.com there is a very very very acive forum. http://www.mainstreetmonroe.com/Voice/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=2 - http://www.mainstreetmonroe.com/Voice/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=2 There are about two dozen new threads a day with hundreds of posts on that forum. Someone put out a thread about the Freddie Mac and Fannie May Fed takeover. That is of course a giant story that has very far reaching implications. It has 3 replies and will soon be pushed off the page for inactivity. I mention this because it’s an example of the average person only worrying about the immediate things that affect them. That story, much like the deficit, will go ignored by most people. |
Ernie wrote:Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Sep 08 2008 at 2:52pm
|
"Was dad really that wrong to think that?"
Nope and I think the same way. But expecting the Gov to be there with even more support is just making the problem worse.
I see the war in Iraq could cost up to 3 Trillion. Better not let my dad see that.
|
Posted By: .308
Date Posted: Sep 08 2008 at 3:03pm
|
Posted By: drumford
Date Posted: Sep 10 2008 at 6:19pm
|
Not to mention that during the Reagon years was the largest shift of wealth ever seen by this country except for......now. ------------- The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it is open. |
Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Oct 10 2008 at 8:03pm
|
I just heard something on CNN that reminded me of this thread. A guy said "Imagine all these banks are poker players sitting around the table playing a game of Texas holdem, then all of a sudden you find out several of the players have no money to back their chips up with. Any sane poker game would end right then." But with the bailout we have of course given these players a re-buy and the game continues. But now with the news tonight that the Fed may to some degree actually nationalize the banks it looks like we are in a manner of speaking all in this poker game like it or not. Anyway.. good early call on the broke thread .308 |
Posted By: .308
Date Posted: Nov 12 2008 at 4:36pm
| ARGH.. I just heard someone at work say, in regards to our National Debt that "We had a surplus under Clinton".. They would not believe me when I told them that Clinton only had individual budget surpluses for the year but that the overall national debt was alive and growing even then. |