War and Debt

Discussion in 'Politics' started by georgephillip, Aug 3, 2011.

  1. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    What happens when a domestic class war meets a global oil war?

    Michael Hudson, former Wall Street economist and current professor at UMKC,:

    "To begin with the most obvious question: If governments run up their debt in the process of carrying out programs that Congress already approved, why would Congress have yet another option to stop the government from following through on these authorized expenditures, by refusing to raise the debt ceiling?

    "The answer is obvious when one looks at why this fail-safe check was introduced in almost every country of the world. Throughout modern history, war has been the major cause of a rising national debt.

    "Most governments operate in fiscal balance during peacetime, financing their spending and investment by levying taxes and charging user fees. War emergencies push this balance into deficit – sometimes for defensive wars, sometimes for aggression...

    "Here was precisely the situation for which the debt ceiling rule was introduced in 1917.

    "President Wilson had taken the United States into the Great War, breaking his election campaign promise not to do so. Isolationists in the United States sought to limit America’s commitment, by imposing Congressional oversight and approval of raising the debt ceiling.

    "This safeguard obviously was intended to be used against unscheduled spending that occurred without Congressional approval.

    "The present rise in U.S. Treasury debt results from two forms of warfare.

    "First is the overtly military Oil War in the Near East, from Iraq to Afghanistan (Pipelinistan) to oil-rich Libya. These adventures will end up costing between $3 and $5 trillion.

    "Second and even more expensive is the more covert yet more costly economic war of Wall Street against the rest of the economy, demanding that losses by banks and financial institutions be passed onto the government balance sheet ('taxpayers').

    "The bailouts and 'free lunch' for Wall Street – by no coincidence, Congress’s number one political campaign contributor – cost $13 trillion."

    Maybe it's time to impose a War Tax on the richest 1% of Americans?

    CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
     
  2. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,263
    Thanks Received:
    1,402
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,081
    While I agreed that "Throughout modern history, war has been the major cause of a rising national debt.", that's not entirely the case in America. In the last 30 years, the accumulation of debt has been spurred as much by Medicare and Medicade as military interventionism.

    The problem is that politicians don't have to pay for anything anymore, be it wars or social programs. The end is the same - crippling debt. End the Fed, restore sound money, and politicians would have actually pay for their wars and programs, which means we'd end up with less of both...and that's a good thing.

    Taxing anyone at any rate is not going to cover the $14.6 trillion of debt we have, nor the additional $7 trillion we expect to add in the next decade (best case scenario). End the Fed and shrink the size of government dramatically and we might have a chance. Otherwise, the future will face superinflation...the only way such debt has ever been resolved. Unfortunately, when people have to use a wheel barrow full of cash to buy bread, war inevitable follows.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. flacaltenn
    Online

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,138
    Thanks Received:
    4,672
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,407
    The left is so FOS on this.. Firstly, Piplinistan is about a NATURAL GAS pipeline which would supply ZERO energy to the USA -- Not oil.. But evidently -- there is MASSIVE ignorance on the left as to the diff between nat gas and oil. That pipeline was proposed because Clinton sold Nat Gas Power plants to India/Pakistan and PROMISED them a supply route. It goes to THEM -- not us --- so they don't have to burn Cowdung.. More importantly -- instability in that country will likely mean it will NEVER GET BUILT.

    Secondly -- we have scored almost NO additional oil benefit from Iraq and/or Libya. If the left thinks that EMBARGOING Iraqi Oil for 12 years really hurt primarily the US -- they are wrong. And even putting that Iraqi oil back on the market gave us almost no relief in the world market.

    It is SO old and tired -- and BOTH parties have continued the same bullshit foreign policy. And yet the mindless WHINING continues. It's obnoxious...
     
  4. zzzz
    Offline

    zzzz Just a regular American

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,072
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Yountsville
    Ratings:
    +429
    Yeah Iraq was not about oil, it was not about WMD's, it was about Saddam trying to kill Bush's daddy and payback. That was the sole reason we went to war and anyone who thinks differently has their head in the sand.
     
  5. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    Follow the money..

    It sure as hell was about money.


    Pallets and pallets of 100 dollar bills just disapearing.
     
  6. flacaltenn
    Online

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,138
    Thanks Received:
    4,672
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,407
    Could it be about FAILED policy of containment and 12 years of locking down the Iraqi economy and BOMBING them daily? ------ NO. Don't bring up the facts.. Just spin your childish crap endlessly.. Could it be because the UN was corruptly pocketing "oil for food" monies and dealing with Sadam in spite of the embargo? --- NO --- It's all about Bush..

    Could it be because Europe was going behind our backs during containment and HOLDING JOBS FAIRS in Baghdad.. --- NO --- "it was payback"..

    Moron... It's time to grow a brain cell..
     
  7. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    "It seems remarkable that Obama’s major focus on the debt ceiling is to warn that Social Security funding must be cut back, along with that of Medicare and other social programs. He went to far as to say that despite the fact that FICA wage set-asides have been invested in Treasury securities for over half a century, the government might not send out checks this week.

    "A radical double standard is at work for democracies. Wall Street investors certainly had no such worry.

    "In fact, interest rates on long-term Treasury bonds actually have gone down over the past month, and especially over the last week.

    "So institutional debt holders obviously expected to get paid.

    "Only the Social Security savers were to be stiffed – or was Obama simply trying to threaten them, so as to depict himself as a hero coming in to save their Social Security by negotiating a Grand Bargain?

    Taxing Wall Street might be a good start.
    Why shouldn't those who profit most from War and Debt pay the costs?

    CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
     
  8. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,263
    Thanks Received:
    1,402
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,081
    What's your point? That government should not have bail out Wall Street? Couldn't agree more.

    You cannot tax Wall Street or any other business or individual enough to overcome our debt. I'm all for less loopholes and a fairer tax system but you cannot overcome our level of debt by ANY taxation. We collect about 15 to 20% of GDP regardless of the tax rates. That's nowhere near enough to pay this debt. Fundamental change in the scope of government is required unless you're fine with the children of the future facing super inflation.

    Now, you want for wars and social programs to actually be paid for? Great, I'm on board. You will have to end the Fed for that to happen.
     
  9. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Why would any sentient being think the only source for corporate profits in Afghanistan or Iraq comes from the sales of natural gas or oil? How many billion$ have war contractors earned so far from killing thousands of women and children?

    Embargoing Iraqi oil didn't help kill 500,000 US children.
    Who got hurt from that?

    Both parties serve the same obnoxious 1% of Americans.
    Why aren't they WHINING?
     
  10. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    There's also an aspect that doesn't get much air-time in the US and that's the oil/currency war.

    Saddam may have made his last mistake when he tried to sell his oil in a currency other than US dollars. Libya made a similar overture just before NATO bombs started falling, and the Rebels took time out early in the Libyan conflict to create their own central bank.

    Apparently the New World Order requires one global central bank, possibly with its own currencies.

    The Real But Unspoken Reasons For The Iraq War
     

Share This Page