Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail?

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Because in the long run when econmies go into these depressions?

BIG CAPITAL increases its percentage of owership as a result.

YOu know how people like to tell us that there is NO pie to divide?

That's not exactly true when it comes to ownership of the mean of production.

While it is true that in a thriving economy, the pie keeps increasing in size?

In a shrinking economy it isn't.

What IS changing during those times?

Who owns what, that's what changes.

When times are hard assets, that people were buying, but now cannot pay for, lose market value.

That's when big money picks them up at bargain prices from people who must sell them or lose everything.

Mitt said we should let foreclosures proceed.
Huge surprise...people like him will buy them and rent them out.

Actually it would be more benefital to get people back to work so they can AFFORD their mortgages. Do you expect the Federal Government to buy out everybody's home? It's not feasible to even consider it. If people can't afford their current home, they have the option to downsize. It's worked during every other recession this country has had to go through, and it's the ability to use "common sense" when you are in a home you can no longer afford.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Seriously? Are you even able to put one foot in front of the other and walk on your own? Let's use a simple example here that even you might be able to understand. There is a husband and wife. The husband understands having a budget and living within his means to supply their NEEDS. The wife has a credit card and feels it entitles her to buy anything she WANTS and put the payment of until "later". She keeps buying and spending and buying and spending and dolling the house up with all sorts of luxuries. The husband looks at the credit card bill and realizes that it is quickly growing to the point that they can no longer afford their NEEDS. He does the sensible thing and takes the credit card away from her to stem the flow of spending and force her to follow a budget. His other alternative is to steal from others to pay for the things his wife bought. The husband is the right and the wife is the left. The right has no desire for the economy to fail. They want it to thrive. They are intelligent enough to know that if you spend more than you can afford, bad things are going to happen......like failed economies.

And for those who are easily gender offended, feel free to swap the role of husband and wife.

That's the problem you can't spend beyond what you can afford as a means to get out of a bad situation, you will only achieve in making matters worse. Looking to someone ELSE to solve your own spending habit never addresses the "core" issue either, only makes them an enabler to further spending.

To continue on with your analogy. It would be like the wife, used in your previous example, goes before her more financially responsible boss and ask him for an advancement in pay to cover your debt. This in turn gives the wife the false pretense to spend even MORE than before, because her need to work within her means is never addressed. Soon she returns yet again to her boss, expecting that he would simply cover once again for her increasing debt. The boss, being the responsible one, says that she won't recieve a raise or advance in pay, until she learns to deal with the outrageous spending addiction that she refuses to acknowledge or put under control.

Again, as kwc previously stated, the role of him or her husband and wife can easily be swapped as "poor spending habits" is not privy to a specific gender.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's. Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Who is advocating default? We have PLENTY of revenue to make interest payments...at least currently we do. Nobody is talking default, we're talking about whether we should be adding even more to the debt or should we be working to reduce our debt. Where do you stand and which approach is more likely to ultimately result in default down the road, more or less debt?

How will you be paying your share by the way?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

We don't just have to make interest payments, principal balances must be paid as they come due. Social Security also has to be paid.

Then it's about damn time we stop spending more than we take it, wouldn't you say?

Great idea.

2010 federal receipts = 1.25 T 2010 federal outlays = 2.66 T.
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary by Fund Group
So you have to cut general budget by only 53% - and you've got a couple of weeks to do it.

Or put it this way - total revnues in 2010, including SS, were 2.16 T.
Mandatory spending was 2.17 T
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget
Mandatory spending includes only interest on the debt, social security, medicare, medicaid, an unemployment. So that leaves NOTHING for everything else in the budget (like DEFENSE) - in fact, its 0.01 T in the red!

Now we could fuck poor children by eliminating medicaid and fuck the unemployed by elminating unemployment, but the savings = 0.86 T would cover defense, veterans affairs, dept. of justice, homeland security, the state dept. and the treasury dept. Leaving nothing for anything else - like, for instance, fixing roads, or funding the scientific research that keeps us ahead of everyone else.


And you expect that the world's investors would believe that balancing the budget in two weeks is a possible feat - without raising taxes? Because the question isn't whether or not the U.S. will intentionally default - but whether or not the market thinks the U.S. will default. If investors think the U.S. will default, they will sell their treasuries, pushing up the interest burden on U.S. debt - and causing eventual actual default.

Let me ask you this - if the U.S. had failed to raise the debt ceiling - would YOU invested in Treasuries?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That's the problem you can't spend beyond what you can afford as a means to get out of a bad situation, you will only achieve in making matters worse.

Did the U.S. make matters worse when deficits went through the roof during WW II? Or did soldiers come home with pockets full of cash and buy homes and open businesses and get degrees?


BTW many successful companies are often in the red for years before becoming profitable. Amazon.com was in the red for almost 5 years after its ipo before posting its first profit. Your assertion the deficit spending is always bad is therefore false.

You also fail to understand the fundamental difference between a household's finances and government finances. The government has a guaranteed source of income so long as there is an economy that can produce tax revenues. This is why folks are willing to loan the U.S. government trillions of dollars at low interest - they know the U.S. has a massive stream of tax revenues due to its massive economy. A couple does not have this luxury, if they lose their jobs they may have no income. The u.s. government also does not die in 70-90 years, like the couple.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's. Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

If it's reactionary to want a limited government that spends only about what it takes in then I must be a reactionary.

 

[Sallow]

They hate Obama more than they love America. It's right there in black and white.

That..and they feel they are entitled to power. All of it.

Clinton was impeached because of that notion.

 

[Sallow]

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's. Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

If it's reactionary to want a limited government that spends only about what it takes in then I must be a reactionary.

Then you may want to move to a "limited" country. One with limited land mass, limited population and limited resources.

We Americans, think America has unlimited potential.

 

[Steelplate]

Do you think the U.S. defaulting on its debt burden would have caused home and 401k values to go up?

Who is advocating default? We have PLENTY of revenue to make interest payments...at least currently we do. Nobody is talking default, we're talking about whether we should be adding even more to the debt or should we be working to reduce our debt. Where do you stand and which approach is more likely to ultimately result in default down the road, more or less debt?

How will you be paying your share by the way?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That type of thinking is what caused out credit downgrade.

 

[Steelplate]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Jesus. Have I ever read a dumber post??

Think not.

Obama has done well to divide... Hate hate hate hate hate hate.....

Really? REALLY? So... what has Obama done to divide? Get elected? All the hate I see is coming directly from the right. Don't even give me the "enemy" thing. What Obama said once and was taken out of context is what your side has been spewing since Nov 2008.

 

[Sallow]

Jesus. Have I ever read a dumber post??

Think not.

Obama has done well to divide... Hate hate hate hate hate hate.....

Really? REALLY? So... what has Obama done to divide? Get elected? All the hate I see is coming directly from the right. Don't even give me the "enemy" thing. What Obama said once and was taken out of context is what your side has been spewing since Nov 2008.

Nothing. Quite the opposite. He's taken each and every Republican idea. Health Care was the Republican solution. The fact they didn't vote on it..and are now engaging in battles to kill it..proves they were never serious about it in the first place. The Bush tax cuts were extended. Obama followed Bush's schedule on both Iraq and Afghanistan. And this despite the braying from the right that Obama was going to "lose" both idiotic wars.

Add in ..he's held all sorts of parties for them. Real live parties. At the White House. And he's put Republicans into top appointments. One of whom, Jon Huntsman, is trying to run against him for President. He's done more to bend over backwards for the opposition then any other President in my lifetime. He beats out Clinton..who was impeached for his efforts to "unify the country".

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you think the U.S. defaulting on its debt burden would have caused home and 401k values to go up?

Who is advocating default? We have PLENTY of revenue to make interest payments...at least currently we do. Nobody is talking default, we're talking about whether we should be adding even more to the debt or should we be working to reduce our debt. Where do you stand and which approach is more likely to ultimately result in default down the road, more or less debt?

How will you be paying your share by the way?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That type of thinking is what caused out credit downgrade.

No, actually out of control spending on Stimulus, Cash for..., etc etc caused the credit downgrade.

 

[Jackson]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

I believe very few want to see the world economy fail. Wish everyone could be met in the center and we wouldn't have labels like "reactionary republicans" or "lunatice liberals." But alas, we all perceive situations from different glasses and the only hope is that we strive for objectivity.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Why does the socialist idiot left want America to fail? Idiot.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Corzine's Failed Stimulus is funny, right?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O55aRrvXtio]Obama: Shovel-Ready Not as Shovel-Ready as We Expected - YouTube[/ame]

 

[bripat9643]

Then you may want to move to a "limited" country. One with limited land mass, limited population and limited resources.

We Americans, think America has unlimited potential.

Unlimited potential for unlimited taxation and unlimited government control over our lives?

Yeah, that sure sounds appealing!

 

[kwc57]

Obama has done well to divide... Hate hate hate hate hate hate.....

Really? REALLY? So... what has Obama done to divide? Get elected? All the hate I see is coming directly from the right. Don't even give me the "enemy" thing. What Obama said once and was taken out of context is what your side has been spewing since Nov 2008.

Nothing. Quite the opposite. He's taken each and every Republican idea. Health Care was the Republican solution. The fact they didn't vote on it..and are now engaging in battles to kill it..proves they were never serious about it in the first place. The Bush tax cuts were extended. Obama followed Bush's schedule on both Iraq and Afghanistan. And this despite the braying from the right that Obama was going to "lose" both idiotic wars.

Add in ..he's held all sorts of parties for them. Real live parties. At the White House. And he's put Republicans into top appointments. One of whom, Jon Huntsman, is trying to run against him for President. He's done more to bend over backwards for the opposition then any other President in my lifetime. He beats out Clinton..who was impeached for his efforts to "unify the country".

You're delusional. Even one of his biggest media cheerleaders, Chris Matthews says he doesn't talk to anybody or lead. Bend over backwards would imply he is in contact with congressmen on either side of the aisle and it simply isn't true. He spouts what he wants, provides no leadership whatsoever and then sits and waits and points fingers when he doesn't get his way. If you can't see that, you need to go have your eyes checked.

Breitbart.tv » Thrill Is Gone? Matthews Turns On Obama; ‘I Hear Stories That You Would Not Believe’

Democratic strategist Pat Caddell even thinks it's time for him to go.

Ex-Bill Clinton pollster urges Obama to give up WH bid for Hillary - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

 

[eflatminor]

Do you think the U.S. defaulting on its debt burden would have caused home and 401k values to go up?

Who is advocating default? We have PLENTY of revenue to make interest payments...at least currently we do. Nobody is talking default, we're talking about whether we should be adding even more to the debt or should we be working to reduce our debt. Where do you stand and which approach is more likely to ultimately result in default down the road, more or less debt?

How will you be paying your share by the way?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That type of thinking is what caused out credit downgrade.

You're saying if we were in even further debt, the credit agencies would have liked that? Are you high?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's. Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

If it's reactionary to want a limited government that spends only about what it takes in then I must be a reactionary.

Its stupid to reduce spending in a depression that's for sure. Ever heard of demand?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

I believe very few want to see the world economy fail. Wish everyone could be met in the center and we wouldn't have labels like "reactionary republicans" or "lunatice liberals." But alas, we all perceive situations from different glasses and the only hope is that we strive for objectivity.

The Democrats in Washington ARE willing to meet in the center. A logical compromise would be spending cuts and tax hikes - the latter hurts Republicans, the former, Democrats. But the Republicans refuse to allow tax hikes - period - because they are entirely unwilling to compromise. If they had been at the Constitutional convention, the Constitution would have never been written, because it would have been their way or the highway - which never works in politics.