Lookin' For That Apology...

[Trajan]

I'm watching the SEC hearing from Wednesday on C-Span right now and the Chairman testified that between 2005 and 2007 they were forced to downsize 10 percent in personnel during that period decimating thier investigation and prosecution capability which led directly to our financial crisis. Maybe you should ask George Bush and the Republican congress for an apology for all of us.

For you who think a smaller government is always better...tell that to yourself and your neighbors as we all pay for these "mistakes/thefts" in our taxes.

yes, thats a point worth discussing but if you look you'll find for instance that they knew of Maddoff, but made a conscious decision not to pursue it, bad move that’s for sure, but its not because they were under-staffed.

Its common knowledge by now that their under-staffing didn't stop them from watching porn and playing games on their computers.

I’d say it was a management problem and yes they who were in charge deserve some of the responsibility for that, no doubt.

And the housing meltdown had nothing to do with lack of SEC oversight; we were long past that point Huggy.

Not according to the witnesses I have been watching for the last hour and a half which include all the top dogs at the SEC.

am glad you are watching, why do they think the SEC was in part responsible for the meltdown....?

 

[daveman]

We cannot cut spending deeply enough or fast enough to address the deficit in time, Dave. The debt load we are carrying is equal to the GDP.

Increasing taxes is a necessity.

Sure. Cripple the economy even further. Grand idea!

There's pain ahead, Dave. How deep and for how long, we could debate, but serious pain is inevitable.

Undoubtedly, because I'm not at all confident the size of government will be cut nearly as much as it needs to be.

 

[Trajan]

I'd say that has nothing to do with my point. You're arguing FOR running up the deficit and debt, I'm arguing against it.

it is exactly on point, 90% of the fed income taxes are paid by folks who use the fewest services rendered in specie or otherwsie.


You said the gov. does not have a right to gov. they don't pay for......well???

I find this incredibly short-sighted, Trajan. The middle class family benefits from the peace, security and sense of hope instilled in the poor by every social program we create -- at least those that don't go completely sideways. Is your family safer or happier is riots break out over food shortages?

Mine certainly is not.

I never said they didn't, the middle class by and large pays net taxes,those below don't and lets be clear that what some consider lower middle class make into that category because of the gov. spending, tax breaks refundable tax credits etc. for their benefit.

I asked NYC for a clarification, I am sure he didn't mean it that way...

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I know they're pissed at P-BO for slowing the revolution.

That isn't it.

Most folks that disagreed with Bush disagreed with his goals and plans more than anything. One thing I did like about Bush is that he had conviction. If he thought something was a good idea, he actively pursued it and he had the leadership ability to bring folks in line behind him. If he thought something wasn't a good idea, he'd fight it with the tools he had. If he didn't care, he deferred to others he trusted.

Obama's problem is radically different. Obama clearly has some strong beliefs, but that's become secondary to his complete lack of leadership skills or his inability to follow through. His tenure so far has been characterized by a complete lack of leadership. Follow the devolution of this Health Care goals into the monstrosity we ended up with. Watch as START falls apart. The Bush Tax cuts? Caved there too. The fact he's having a hard time keeping the military in line. The list goes on and on and on.

I'm actually starting to buy into the Jimmy Carter comparison at this point. Carter was a good and decent man, but his cardinal sin as President is that he was lead by events, rather than leading them. Carter's moments of true leadership (like the Camp David accords) were few and far between. We're seeing Obama fall into the same pattern: he doesn't shape events, they shape him.

That's part of why I think it's entirely likely he's a one term President. If the GOP runs a sane candidate, they'll take the White House in 2012.

 

[daveman]

This is not about 'prosperity'. This is about fiscal responsibility. Fiscal responsiblity is not a stimulus program.

And the stimulus wasn't fiscally responsible, either.

[But let's look at the numbers. According to Recovery.gov, Obama has funded 675,841 jobs. Obama has also increased the debt by $3,219,617,798,657.

The math says that for every job credited to Obama, it's cost us $4,763,868.72.

Do you really want to keep defending that?

The stimulus was not effective at restarting the economy, but it's likely it prevented even deeper deflation. Are you suggesting we'd have been better off without it?

If your complaint is too much money was wasted I dun think you'll find anyone to argue with.

Yes, we'd have been better off without it....or at least dividing the money up and giving an equal share to every citizen.

 

[Madeline]

You can't tax a nation into prosperity.

What a catchy slogan. So, IYO, we just whistle in the dark while the deficit looms over our heads and hope we never need borrow again?

Great plan, Dave.

All government ultimately fails. It was not until after FDR stopped "Stimulating" the economy and the war pushed the need for private sector production to grow to make products for our fighting men as well as infrastructure did this nation pull out of the great depression. 1920, same thing, government was cut 50% and the nation recovered and went into the roaring 20's in 18 months.

Taxation removes money from the private sector and consumption because it is taken away from anything that produces. Therefore every dollar removed is a dollar that shrinks the private sector which grows all economies and instead increases the burden on it. Ultimately, till government shrinks and is replaced by the private sector, this nation will continue to fail. Just like Cuba does, and the USSR, and Eastern Europe, and China. Great example, China. They killed 50 million to starvation during the 'glorious revolution' with silly ideas as making 'backyard steel', but when they turned to letting the capitalists go, suddenly they became an economic powerhouse.

Who'da thunk? Even those commies got it right: Capitalism works. Communism goes broke and starves.

"All government ultimately fails"? You been reading too much Marx, my Big Fizzy friend. Fascism does not work, except as a bridge government between an agarian society and an industrialized one. I get tired of repeating this, but for you doll, anything: there has never and will never be an actual communist government anywhere on Planet Earth (unless you count communes of a dozen or so people) because people are not hard wired to cooperate and never will be.

As for what ended the Great Depression, I realize it is fashionable now to side with economic theorists who claim the New Deal did not affect it or deepened it, and that WW II actually ended it. Assuming that this is true, which I do not, what use is that data? We can hardly engage in worldwide warfare again.

 

[Trajan]

Pay as you go has to work both ways. No spending without paying for it. No tax cuts without paying for them.

so NOW you're a believer in paygo?

I've advocated PAYGO since long before I was ever here.

hummm, I have not seen nor heard concomitant angst over the dems repeated submarining of paygo from you however, if I am wrong can you direct me to that missive?

Further you are now making cases over a tax situation, where by you are saying if we don't raise taxes the economy will suffer because the raise in in taxes was foretasted and counted in to pay for spending that has already taken place so it needs to be paid for.

okay, well the dems skirted paygo for instance 3 times , every nov or dec. starting in nov. 07 by writing an end run around AMT without paying for it...Pay-Go.

What about that tax revenue that the gov didn't get that added to the deficit?

 

[Trajan]

So you're going to tell us that the only government spending you want to cut that would take money out of anyone's pockets is welfare spending?

lolol. And how much does that amount to?

Let me ask you this. If this country did do a meaningful spending reduction, what are you willing to sacrifice?

did you watch the you tube video NYC?

I have a computer issue from where I am today. I couldn't load it.

no problem, I'll remind you tomorrow.

 

[Big Fitz]

"All government ultimately fails"?

LOL... although this is true... I meant to say "All government STIMULUS ultimately Fails." My edit failed.

 

[Madeline]

"All government ultimately fails"?

LOL... although this is true... I meant to say "All government STIMULUS ultimately Fails." My edit failed.

Look, I'm not laying claim to any expertise on macroeconomics here, Fizzy, but I have to question all this complaining about the stimulus. Do you seriously think it did us harm? That Obama should not have ordered it?

Seems to me, it was more symbolic than anything....quelled panic, and to that degree, it was effective. You disagree?

 

[Big Fitz]

As for what ended the Great Depression, I realize it is fashionable now to side with economic theorists who claim the New Deal did not affect it or deepened it, and that WW II actually ended it. Assuming that this is true, which I do not, what use is that data? We can hardly engage in worldwide warfare again.

Actually this is an acknowledge fact by even most textbooks written before 1990. I know that it was taught to me in this fashion in High School. War is not the key here: Demand for private sector production is. This nation has been rotted out like a mighty oak struck with a fungal disease that ate away the core wood. Our manufacturing is gone because of Bretton Woods and then kept away through more insane government regulations making it economically unviable to manufacture here and then driving those who were still viable out with eco mandates to raise their costs through the roof. Unions, like deadly infections have effectively destroyed large manufacturers thanks to weakening them with unsustainable benefits and wages.

We need to get government out of the way and quit wasting money on bureaucracy, parasite public sector unions which should be banned outright as unfair labor agreements. Breaking the back of the teachers unions and privatizing all education would free up over a third of all state and local budgets and possibly 20% of the federal. Let this be provided, as is constitutional, by the private sector.

Putting money in the hands of individuals to invest, and stabilizing the tax and legal code for businesses and ending government meddling in directing the markets are all necessary for us to survive this depression we're in now. Till you do these things, we will continue to diminish till the revolution or invasion begins as we will no longer be able to defend ourselves from threats within or without.

Which of course, is the left's goal. Look at the riots in England over tuition hikes on these entitlement junkies. It's only months away from coming here. Then what will you do?

 

[Big Fitz]

Do you seriously think it did us harm? That Obama should not have ordered it?

I think it has caused a mortal wound to this nation as surely as a knife to the lung is deathly serious. If it is not addressed and undone ASAP, it will destroy this nation. This was slid between our ribs in 2008, pre election by the Pelosi/Reid congress and the less than conservative W with the fucking retard Bernake sharpening the blade.

 

[Madeline]

As for what ended the Great Depression, I realize it is fashionable now to side with economic theorists who claim the New Deal did not affect it or deepened it, and that WW II actually ended it. Assuming that this is true, which I do not, what use is that data? We can hardly engage in worldwide warfare again.

Actually this is an acknowledge fact by even most textbooks written before 1990. I know that it was taught to me in this fashion in High School. War is not the key here: Demand for private sector production is. This nation has been rotted out like a mighty oak struck with a fungal disease that ate away the core wood. Our manufacturing is gone because of Bretton Woods and then kept away through more insane government regulations making it economically unviable to manufacture here and then driving those who were still viable out with eco mandates to raise their costs through the roof. Unions, like deadly infections have effectively destroyed large manufacturers thanks to weakening them with unsustainable benefits and wages.

We need to get government out of the way and quit wasting money on bureaucracy, parasite public sector unions which should be banned outright as unfair labor agreements. Breaking the back of the teachers unions and privatizing all education would free up over a third of all state and local budgets and possibly 20% of the federal. Let this be provided, as is constitutional, by the private sector.

Putting money in the hands of individuals to invest, and stabilizing the tax and legal code for businesses and ending government meddling in directing the markets are all necessary for us to survive this depression we're in now. Till you do these things, we will continue to diminish till the revolution or invasion begins as we will no longer be able to defend ourselves from threats within or without.

Which of course, is the left's goal. Look at the riots in England over tuition hikes on these entitlement junkies. It's only months away from coming here. Then what will you do?

What an anarchist you are, Fizzy. Did your history books also teach you about the conditions people lived in before we had such things as the SEC?

 

[Big Fitz]

As for what ended the Great Depression, I realize it is fashionable now to side with economic theorists who claim the New Deal did not affect it or deepened it, and that WW II actually ended it. Assuming that this is true, which I do not, what use is that data? We can hardly engage in worldwide warfare again.

Actually this is an acknowledge fact by even most textbooks written before 1990. I know that it was taught to me in this fashion in High School. War is not the key here: Demand for private sector production is. This nation has been rotted out like a mighty oak struck with a fungal disease that ate away the core wood. Our manufacturing is gone because of Bretton Woods and then kept away through more insane government regulations making it economically unviable to manufacture here and then driving those who were still viable out with eco mandates to raise their costs through the roof. Unions, like deadly infections have effectively destroyed large manufacturers thanks to weakening them with unsustainable benefits and wages.

We need to get government out of the way and quit wasting money on bureaucracy, parasite public sector unions which should be banned outright as unfair labor agreements. Breaking the back of the teachers unions and privatizing all education would free up over a third of all state and local budgets and possibly 20% of the federal. Let this be provided, as is constitutional, by the private sector.

Putting money in the hands of individuals to invest, and stabilizing the tax and legal code for businesses and ending government meddling in directing the markets are all necessary for us to survive this depression we're in now. Till you do these things, we will continue to diminish till the revolution or invasion begins as we will no longer be able to defend ourselves from threats within or without.

Which of course, is the left's goal. Look at the riots in England over tuition hikes on these entitlement junkies. It's only months away from coming here. Then what will you do?

What an anarchist you are, Fizzy. Did your history books also teach you about the conditions people lived in before we had such things as the SEC?

One, I'm not arguing against the SEC. They are a useful tool to stop corruption, the same way the Sherman Anti Trust Act stops monopolies and trusts from committing actions that are unfair for competition.

I am not anti-regulation, I am a firm believer in LIGHT regulation. You protect competition and equal play. You do not use the government to force outcomes or plan the economy or even replace the private sector.

The conditions we lived in before the era of Prohibition for instance were appaling socially. 24 hour taverns, people dying from alcohol poisoning and drinking dangerous chemicals like chloral Hydrate and Benzene! yes the solvant! Children tall enough to reach the bar as long as they could pay were horrible banes on society. Not to mention the violence in the home this caused. That was the reason for the temperance movement. But prohibition was too much. RESPONSIBLE laws and social controls were needed so we can co-exist.

MADD is trying to go back to the Carrie Nation point of view trying to put breathalizers in every car and all but ban intoxication. DWI laws at .08 are responsible limits.

In business we have effectively created prohibition on manufacturing by ecofascist levels of regulation. We are confiscatory in our taxation of industry, particularly small business which we should be doing everything possible to make them taxed and bureaucratized as little as possible so they can provide the best production and wages at highest employment.

I am not an anarchist, I am a libertarian conservative who wants us to go back to strict originalist interpretation of the constitution. Of course that would mean reducing the federal government's size by about 70% and 90% of it's services. Government should never do what a charity or business does. Ever. It is immoral and unethical.

 

[Madeline]

Amazingly, I agree with much of what you've written, Fizzy.

 

[Big Fitz]

.
.
.
.
.
.
(see? You're not as bad as your press is. I'll turn you yet. hee hee hee)

 

[NYcarbineer]

You can't tax a nation into prosperity.

This is not about 'prosperity'. This is about fiscal responsibility. Fiscal responsiblity is not a stimulus program.

And the stimulus wasn't fiscally responsible, either.

[But let's look at the numbers. According to Recovery.gov, Obama has funded 675,841 jobs. Obama has also increased the debt by $3,219,617,798,657.

The math says that for every job credited to Obama, it's cost us $4,763,868.72.

Do you really want to keep defending that?

I'm not defending it. I'm questioning your support for a repeat of it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Good thing that's not what I'm advocating, huh?

We cannot cut spending deeply enough or fast enough to address the deficit in time, Dave. The debt load we are carrying is equal to the GDP.

Increasing taxes is a necessity.

Sure. Cripple the economy even further. Grand idea!

You insist the 2009 stimulus didn't work, but insist we do it again. Why is that?

 

[rightwinger]

so if I told you that people who make say, over 250K, use fewer services, receive fewer goods etc. as compared to people who say make less than 45K which I believe is still the median income for the US, what would you say?

I'd say that has nothing to do with my point. You're arguing FOR running up the deficit and debt, I'm arguing against it.

it is exactly on point, 90% of the fed income taxes are paid by folks who use the fewest services rendered in specie or otherwsie.


You said the gov. does not have a right to gov. they don't pay for......well???

That is complete and total Bull Shit

It is the wealthy who benefit the most from our taxes. The military does not help the poor. They maintain an international security that enable the extremely wealthy to make more money. Our roads, railways, international shipping all help the wealthy. Tax code is written by the wealthy...for the wealthy.
Our education system provides an educated workforce that the wealthy benefits from but does not pay for. Our welfare system enables businesses to pay substandard wages and have the government pay for housing and food subsidies

 

[NYcarbineer]

Of course it makes sense. If spending is cut at the same time taxes are lowered, the debt would be paid off in short order.

What you don't want to do is cut spending -- because you'd lose a lot of Democrat voters.

Now YOU"RE agreeing with me. I'm saying taxes can't be cut unless spending is cut at the same time. THAT'S my opposition to this GOP/Obama stimulus package.

Now you're saying do it at the same time, but, you won't INSIST on doing it at the same time, you're willing to let them do the easy part, cutting taxes. That never works. The cuts are never made later.

Pay as you go has to work both ways. No spending without paying for it. No tax cuts without paying for them.

It's funny the way you pretend you want to decrease the size of the government.

Where have you been the last two years while the Democrats were skyrocketing the deficit?

You have never heard me tout deficits. This is not about the size of government, this is about paying for the government the people get no matter what size it is.