Do We Bring Hard Economic Times Upon Ourselves?

[Adam's Apple]

Economic Crisis Is of Our Own Making
By Rod Dreher, Dallas Morning News
April 3, 2008

For nearly a generation, Americans have had the luxury to organize their political fights around cultural issues like abortion and gay rights because economics haven't been central to either politics or culture. And we have financed the illusion of sustainable progress through massive accumulation of debt, both personal and governmental. Prosperity masked decline; optimism occluded realism. As historian John Lukacs writes of the boom years in the current Chronicles, "The middle class habits (and virtues) of permanence, of saving, of passing their assets — and values — on to their children disappeared."

That now must change. The cost of our grand national experiment in living beyond our means is now coming due, and not just in the form of the housing crash. If the country indeed goes into a long, deep recession, forcing austerity and worse on the general public, the full social cost of casting aside traditional communal bonds and moral values — the beliefs that enabled people to thrive during hard times — will be painfully manifest. The psychological shock to the body politic will be sharp.

The credit crisis is not occurring in a vacuum. Consider:

for full article:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0408/dreher.php3

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And which party "cast aside" those moral bonds? Which party for 40 years ran up deficit after deficit and raped the Social Security fund and the Road repair fund?

 

[Paulie]

And which party "cast aside" those moral bonds? Which party for 40 years ran up deficit after deficit and raped the Social Security fund and the Road repair fund?

It's just like you to blame it all on the OTHER side.

 

[Toro]

And which party "cast aside" those moral bonds? Which party for 40 years ran up deficit after deficit and raped the Social Security fund and the Road repair fund?

The Republicans and their bizarre notions that tax cuts pay for themselves.

 

[Toro]

That was a good article, and he's probably right.

BTW, for those who look through a political spectrum for everything, this is a national problem brought about by the people, not the parties. The parties are merely reflecting what the voters wanted. This is a problem the American people have to face first.

This isn't a Republican v Democrat issue.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

The democrats squandered money for 40 years, and then the republicans got into power on the smaller government issue in 1994. By 1999, they were outspending the democrats and have done so since. So yes, it's both parties.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The Republicans and their bizarre notions that tax cuts pay for themselves.

When were the Republicans in charge foe 40 years?

 

[Dr Grump]

When were the Republicans in charge foe 40 years?

Ronald Raygun wasn't a president? Neither were the Bushes, Nixon or Ford? I must have been living in a time warp. And before you say congress was Dem controlled, your president has a lot of power and the the power of veto. So do try and keep up...

 

[Annie]

I believe he said the democrats had power for 40 years. :shrug:

 

[Dr Grump]

I believe he said the democrats had power for 40 years. :shrug:

When?

 

[Annie]

When?

Here:

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=666603&postcount=6

You were responding to someone who'd misread.

 

[Care4all]

And which party "cast aside" those moral bonds? Which party for 40 years ran up deficit after deficit and raped the Social Security fund and the Road repair fund?

Retsgt!!!!!!!!! hahahahaha! My God!!!!

In 1983, 25 years ago NOT 40 yrs ago, Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan came up with the idea that OVER TAXING US for SS would solve the baby boomer problem....by collecting a SURPLUS of SS monies from the Boomers for their future Boomer senior generation, so the pay as you go ceased to exit the way it once was with SS. Ronald Reagan had Congress raise the SS taxes on ALL OF US....

He started "stealing" the money immediately following this.....

NOT a Democrat BUT a REPUBLICAN innitially put us in this forsaken mess in the first place!!! geez louise....

When they instituted OVERTAXING us for SS under Reagan, they SHOULD HAVE at that time, taken SS out of the General Revenue funds so it could not be raided for general income tax fund purposes, but NOOOOOOO Reagan needed to hide his overspending and his debt too.

I am not denying that all Presidents since Reagan have raided the fund also, with the exception of President Clinton's last year or two in office where i believe, with the help of the republican congress, managed to get our budget in line and not raid the SS surplus.

What you are not mentioning though is that the surplusses of Social Security were scheduled to go up each year until the boomers started retiring....

So as example under Clinton they ran about 75 billion a year in SS surplusses.
So they could only "steal" from us....so much.

But under President Bush, because the time period is so close to the boomer retirement, the SS surplusses boomed as they were scheduled to do so the average SS surplusses collected from us was on average $300Billion a year!!!!

$300 BILLION A YEAR, on avg, has been spent by president Bush and his Congress of our SS surplus monies....

MORE THAN ALL PRESIDENTS COMBINED since Reagan!!! In just one 4 year term he "stole" more of SS Surplus funds than what was "stolen" to that point in our History of SS theft.

We are in trouble, bigtime, i do not disagree.

BOTH SIDES contributed to this problem, I agree.

However, MOST of our problems with SS being "stolen" from us were caused by Republicans and taken by Republicans through their spending under this administration's budget!!! Put the blame where it belongs!!

Care

 

[Dr Grump]

Here:

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=666603&postcount=6

You were responding to someone who'd misread.

By when, I meant which 40 years...

 

[Annie]

By when, I meant which 40 years...

Fair enough.

 

[JeffWartman]

And which party "cast aside" those moral bonds? Which party for 40 years ran up deficit after deficit and raped the Social Security fund and the Road repair fund?

The Republicans have been doing a great job of that for the last 7 years.

 

[JeffWartman]

The democrats squandered money for 40 years, and then the republicans got into power on the smaller government issue in 1994. By 1999, they were outspending the democrats and have done so since. So yes, it's both parties.

Of course it is.

Only the uneducated believe that the Republicans have any moral high ground on cutting spending.

 

[Uknow_me72]

Yes we do by buying things that we do not need.

 

[midcan5]

I don't buy the premise of this thread, the rich still support their own and very well. Anyone here know the cost of the major universities? And they are full, with parents footing the bill for many? It is the lower middle class and the working poor who are having a hard time keeping up.

 

[Zoomie1980]

That was a good article, and he's probably right.

BTW, for those who look through a political spectrum for everything, this is a national problem brought about by the people, not the parties. The parties are merely reflecting what the voters wanted. This is a problem the American people have to face first.

This isn't a Republican v Democrat issue.

No, he's only modestly..."right" He makes two assumptions that are either categorically WRONG or in now proven.

One -- That China and India's growth is driving the oil demand based crisis. Of the roughly 83M a day or so of world wide oil consumption the US consumes about 25M of it. That's about 28%. China and India COMBINED are only a FRACTION of that. Japan, and Europe consume another 35%. Their growth RATE is much larger than anyone else but their RAW GROWTH is still DRAWFED by the US, Europe and Japan. And most will finally come to realize that since the first of the year US consumption is down almost 5% from a year ago and for 2008 may decline as much as 10%. That's 2.5M barrels a day. And wha-la, guess what, Europe and Japan are following suite down a solid 5% as well. china and india will still see consumption growth but at a MUCH SLOWER RATE and vastly overshadowed by declining consumption, mostlyu in the US. And that US slowdown in oil consumption is likely PERMANENT as the US permanently changes it's habits and rapidly transitions to hybrids and electrics and baby boomers age and stop driving as they enter retirement.

Two -- climate change is catastrophic. There is this ridiculous notion that climate change, as in warming, if it exists at all, is universally BAD???? Modest Global warming is actually a GOOD thing as it could potentially bring into food consumption vast millions and millions of acres in Canada and Russia that have always been too cold to raise crops. at the same time LOWER global heating requirements LESSENING energy consumption. and where does that assumption that water will get scarcer come from??? Evaporation from oceans will INCREASE which in turn will continue to get rung out over continental landmasses putting MORE water into our environment, not less. not to mention greater oceanic evaporation rates would lessen the impact of rising sea levels.


That being said, yes, Americans are going to have to re-learn what our grandparents knew, to live within their means. Gone are the days when one can earn $100,000 a year and use that as justification to buy a $500,000 house. I'm already part of that trend having ditched a $450,000 5000sq ft house for a $220,000 3000sq ft house even though I could now easily afford a $1,000,000, 8000sqft house....because I simply didn't need something that big. And I may downsize again in 15 years when I get tired of maintaining that one.

If this "crisis" shocks Americans back into sensibility, then it's not a crisis at all but a national god-send.

 

[Paulie]

No, he's only modestly..."right" He makes two assumptions that are either categorically WRONG or in now proven.

One -- That China and India's growth is driving the oil demand based crisis. Of the roughly 83M a day or so of world wide oil consumption the US consumes about 25M of it. That's about 28%. China and India COMBINED are only a FRACTION of that. Japan, and Europe consume another 35%. Their growth RATE is much larger than anyone else but their RAW GROWTH is still DRAWFED by the US, Europe and Japan. And most will finally come to realize that since the first of the year US consumption is down almost 5% from a year ago and for 2008 may decline as much as 10%. That's 2.5M barrels a day. And wha-la, guess what, Europe and Japan are following suite down a solid 5% as well. china and india will still see consumption growth but at a MUCH SLOWER RATE and vastly overshadowed by declining consumption, mostlyu in the US. And that US slowdown in oil consumption is likely PERMANENT as the US permanently changes it's habits and rapidly transitions to hybrids and electrics and baby boomers age and stop driving as they enter retirement.

Two -- climate change is catastrophic. There is this ridiculous notion that climate change, as in warming, if it exists at all, is universally BAD???? Modest Global warming is actually a GOOD thing as it could potentially bring into food consumption vast millions and millions of acres in Canada and Russia that have always been too cold to raise crops. at the same time LOWER global heating requirements LESSENING energy consumption. and where does that assumption that water will get scarcer come from??? Evaporation from oceans will INCREASE which in turn will continue to get rung out over continental landmasses putting MORE water into our environment, not less. not to mention greater oceanic evaporation rates would lessen the impact of rising sea levels.


That being said, yes, Americans are going to have to re-learn what our grandparents knew, to live within their means. Gone are the days when one can earn $100,000 a year and use that as justification to buy a $500,000 house. I'm already part of that trend having ditched a $450,000 5000sq ft house for a $220,000 3000sq ft house even though I could now easily afford a $1,000,000, 8000sqft house....because I simply didn't need something that big. And I may downsize again in 15 years when I get tired of maintaining that one.

If this "crisis" shocks Americans back into sensibility, then it's not a crisis at all but a national god-send.

For once, I agree with you. Especially your second part, and your last statements.

I don't want to hear anyone who lives in an area with a good growing season complaining about food shortages. Quit relying on corporate farming and grocery stores for your food and fucking GROW YOUR OWN.