Goodbye cruel world

[Si modo]

What part didnt you get?

Do you understand how finance works?

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.


"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Our very own Fed will be happy to lend us more ( at an elevated interest rate ), God bless em.

 

[Sallow]

Still non-responsive.

Recap: You said we have enough money to pay our debt. Where is that money?

What part didnt you get?

Do you understand how finance works?

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.

"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

 

[dilloduck]

What part didnt you get?

Do you understand how finance works?

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.

"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

 

[Sallow]

I have no idea how this answers my question.

Oh.

I will go slower.

WE-COULD-HAVE-STARTED-PAYING-DOWN-THE-DEBT-IN-2001. INSTEAD-BUSH-CUT-TAXES.

WE-CAN-FINANCE-THE-DEBT-NOW. AND-MAYBE-PAY-IT-DOWN-BY-SUNSETTING-THE-TAX-CUTS-CUTTING/CLOSING-LOOPHOLES-AND-RECAPTURING-TAXES-FROM-TAX-CHEATS.

Or we can kill the poor like Jan Brewer by cutting medicare and welfare.

But eventually..as the french found out the hard way..enough misery leads to revolution.

Ah, there it is again, the liberal's solution to every problem - BIGGER GOVERNMENT, HIGHER TAXES. Poverty? No problem, Bigger Government, raise taxes! Recession? No problem-Bigger Government, raise taxes! War? No problem-Bigger government, raise taxes! The deficit? No problem, bigger government, raise taxes! Whatever the problem, TAX and SPEND, SPEND, SPEND! Hell if you democrats had your way, the government would own everything, your party would control everything, your party would decide how much we work, how much of what we produce you'd let us keep, when we sleep, how much we eat, and what we eat, because according to you the almighty federal government (so long as YOU control it, naturally) knows better that we do what's good for us. That Ivy League, arrogant, egomaniacal, statist prick you put in the White House is a perfect example of everything I detest about your party. You hate individual freedom, you want total government control of it all (again, all run by elitists like you, who are arrogant enough, and stupid enough, to believe you know it all). Government for the elite, by the elite, and the people be damned!

Well, this time, you are NOT going to get your way. This time, the rest of us have had enough, and I do not care, if we bring the whole house of cards down, or if that leads to revolution. Maybe we need a revolution, to clean out that cesspool on the Potomac. What you and your elitist, statist attitude have created is a sham, a lie, and a fraud! Just as Lincoln and the Radical Republican Jacobins of the nineteenth century destroyed the Republic, you have finally run the dissolute Empire that replaced it into the ground! The corporatist republican politicians who have helped you do it are little better; they want a corporate, militarized state, you want a socialist, command economy, nanny state, but BOTH want an all-powerful state, to divide among themselves. I hope it doesn't come to a choice, but I'd prefer absolute anarchy to either!

You want the truth? The truth is, that BOTH major political parties have flim-flammed the people, narcotized them with easy credit and phony prosperity, bought off the poor, instead of helping them, created a culture of dependency to buy votes, encouraged illegal immigration for votes and profit, and continued a giant Ponzi scheme called Social Security and Medicare (knowing it would become insolvent), and spent beyond the Nation's means, in a complete exercise in social and fiscal irresponsibility. Those aren't chickens coming home to roost, those are vultures, coming to feed on the rotten, decaying carcass. The party's over (BOTH of them!), and the American people are going to have to become self reliant again, instead of looking for a free lunch that is not free at all. The difference between me and you, is that I believe the people are capable of doing that, despite the pain of recovering from a well-conditioned addiction to the largesse of political thieves and hucksters.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo]‪A Few Good Man "You Can't Handle the Truth"‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Si modo]

What part didnt you get?

Do you understand how finance works?

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.

"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

And, now back to my original point: So the fuck what? It is no argument to continue insanity.

 

[Si modo]

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.

"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

It's the idiotic tu quoque argument that means shit.

 

[Sallow]

Oh, I understand it well. Borrowing more to pay debt while saying "we" have the money to cover our debt is idiotic, at best.

"We" do not, N-O-T, have money to pay our debt.

The world is well aware of this.

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

 

[xsited1]

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

You must really hate what the Obama Administration has done. I hope you didn't vote for him.

 

[Si modo]

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

So, Bush was bad for spending more than revenues, and Obama is going to 'fix' that by spending even more than revenues, so Obama is good.

Got it.

 

[dilloduck]

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

If you call what Obama has been doing doing a "fix" we are really in trouble.

 

[Foxfyre]

Our President may be the most incompetent President in American history, but even though he has surrounded himself with some highly questionable people, he must be getting some good advice from somewhere. He seems to be catching on that his scare tactics that social security checks might not go out if the debt ceiling isn't raised--a bald faced lie by the way--and that it is all Bush's fault--stated yet again in last Friday's speech--isn't holding up well these days.

And somebody must have finally gotten to him that even if we raise the debt ceiling but fail to cut spending, our credit rating will be downgraded for the first time in like forever, and he isn't going to want to have that happen on his watch.

So emphasizing that the man really doesn't have a clue, but is going every which way to be on the 'winning' side of this, it has been a fascinating thing to watch.

First he wanted a congressional vote on raising the debt ceiling separated from spending cuts. Now he wants them linked.

Then he said he would reject a short-term deal to raise the borrowing limit. Now he says he could make an exception.

He magnanimouly pledged to meet with congressional leaders every single day until a deal was reached. That lasted five days and then the daily meetings disappeared from his schedule.

He said an emphatic no re linking an increase to spending cuts. "We do not need to play chicken with our economy by linking the raising of the debt ceiling to anything," White House spokesman Jay Carney said April 11. A few days later Obama in an AP interview said raising the debt ceiling wasn't going to happen without some cuts.

Three months later, Carney was saying: "The dynamic that's created here, for better or for worse -- and we think now for better -- that has linked these two has focused attention and focused people's minds on the need to do something significant around deficit reduction."

The White House has had to recalibrate its position on whether Obama would back a short-term increase to avoid a default.

At a July 11 news conference, Obama insisted he would not back a short-term increase to avoid a default. "This is the United States of America, and we don't manage our affairs in three-month increments," he said.

Now aides say Obama would approve an increase for a few days, but only there was agreement on a long-term deal, and more time was needed for the legislative process.

Now all he has to do is cave on his silly insistance that spending cuts be tied to increasing taxes on the rich, and he has the Republicans with him a hundred percent.

All he has to do is convince an intransigent Harry Reid and the other Democrats in the Senate.

It's like watching a floating crap game, but for a dedicated process/media watcher, it has been fascinating.

 

[Steve Hanson]

Which..is..EXACTLY..WHAT..PRESIDENT..BUSH..DID.

Why the fuck are you people so dense?

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

What has Obama done to reverse these terrible actions by GWB? And just how did the repeal of Glass Steagall effect the economy?

to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector. BTW, Obama gave more money to the private sector than any other president

 

[Si modo]

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

What has Obama done to reverse these terrible actions by GWB? And just how did the repeal of Glass Steagall effect the economy?

to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector. BTW, Obama gave more money to the private sector than any other president

C'mon! Obama had a lot of votes he had to pay for. At least Obama is able to pay those debts.

 

[Foxfyre]

are you suggesting making the same mistake again ?

First I "suggest" that we fix the problems caused by 8 years of gross and very incompetent government. The Bush administration, yet again, fucked things up so royally that it was necessary..like with the Reagan administration's fuck ups..to use tax payer money to bail out the private sector.

Then I "suggest" once the economy is stablized..we really address the debt problem by cutting some spending, increasing revenue..and re-introducing Paygo.

Then I "suggest" we introduce regulations to keep the same thing from happening again..and bring back *gasp*, Glass-Steagall.

So, Bush was bad for spending more than revenues, and Obama is going to 'fix' that by spending even more than revenues, so Obama is good.

Got it.

But. . . .but. . . .if they don't keep the focus on Bush, then the logical place to put the blame 2-1/2 years later is. . . . .

Using their logic, Bush 41 and Reagan get all the credit for the Clinton years.

 

[editec]

I do NOT believe the US Federal Government will fail to make payments to its creditors.

But if we did, there's a few things I think we all know will happen, and yes indeed, they WILL effect that precious bleeding stock market of ours.

Let us ask ourselves: Who OWNS these bonds that we're theoretically going to default on?

Well certainly, foreign central banks own them by the trillions.

And Social Security owns about 1/4 of all US debt, too

But YOUR 401Ks, your banks, your insurance companies, the corporations in which you own stock, OWN the rest of that debt.

Do you think their market value declines when their so-called assets (the US debt instruments they own) collapse in value to god only knows what lows?

In fact, in the case of banks, many of those count on their T-Bills as a big part of their capitalization.And if the banks CAPITILIZATION (T-bills) are worthless, then the banks must not lend out anymore money because many of them are no longer solvent.

Now as to larger corporations?

You know that supposed $4 trillion ("in cash??) they are credited as currently sitting on?How much of THAT do you think in the form of T-Bills T-, kids? Here's a something to consider...It's MOST OF IT!!!

Now seriously...the people (and their market demand) go down because the FED is not paying their SSI and government pensions; the banks go down because they are all suddenly undercapitalized; the value of stocks of major corporations go down because their CASH POSITIONS (they don't have bills in the vault, they have T-BILLS in their vaults) collapses; and FINALLY, the government goes down because it isn't paying its bills.

Allowing the above to happen will, I suspect, throw the entire world economy into flux.

When the rest of the world comes out of that flux, you can bet your ass that the USD will no longer be the world's exchange currency.

The rest of the world will HATE the USA.

We, the citizens of the USA, we 290,000,000 or so who were not rich enough to get our assets out of this nation, will be PAUPERS awash in sea of debt that benefited very few of us EVER.

Now is that really going to happen?

I kinda doubt it

But if is does, that will that certainly teach the USA a lesson it soon won't forget, won't it? Here's the lesson it will teach us:

Politics by SPITE? Not really such a good idea​

 

[elvis]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMuOSVGAF4Q]‪Pink Floyd - Goodbye Cruel World‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

If the US defaults and/or our credit is downgraded, our stock market is going to plummet. Think 2008 was scary? Look at 2011. Imagine watching the DOW plummet 1000 points in a day. 2,000. Think DOW 6500 was bad? Wait til DOW 3500.

The radical right wing Republicans are going to kill us all and destroy an already fragile economy.

US debt default will do that? How?

Although I don't think the US will default on its debt just because it can't borrow more. In fact, every dollar paid in Social Security reduces the debt. The US is free to issue bonds up to the limit. This, like the rush to appropriate money for all those "shovel ready" jobs that didn't exist, is just another money grab.

Congress consistently brings the Government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar. The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations. It means we have a well-earned reputation for reliability and credibility – two things that set us apart from much of the world.

1. How many *Negros* do you know who have perfect credit and pay their bills on time?
2. Why you be putting such a high standard on Obama anyways sucker?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Lars]

There are debts this country has run up..like financing 2 wars..that we will default on. If there isn't enough money in the treasury to finance those debts..penalties will accrue. We also have foreign debts subject to the same risk.

What this will do is demostrate to other nations that this country is so dysfunctional it cannot even take care of it's finances. They will look to other currencies to purchase and peg their own to. And they will look to other countries to make trade agreements with.

This works fine if your goal is to be a pariah and isolationist. And it would turn this country, effectively, into a third world country with a big military.

How's that working out for the Democratic Republic of North Korea?

Do you honestly think that other countries don't already know that we don't have enough to pay our debts?

So they will be looking more at the Free Market/Oligarchical models of China and Singapore as examples of a system to follow.

Thanks to conservatives.

If only that were the case, China actually has a growing middle class and Singapore consistently outperforms the United States in regards to GDP(PPP) per Capita, this year by 8,000 dollars a year(it also ranks higher on the heritage index of economic freedom, no coincidence).