Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The United States Government Is Insolvent  
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2640 times:

http://drmss.com/wordpress/?cat=1

A few points to ponder:

- David Walker, Comptroller of the US, said that the GAO (General Accounting Office) found so many "material deficiencies in the government's accounting systems" that the GAO was 'unable to express an opinion' on the financial statements."

- Combined federal deficits total more than 400% of GDP. Our nation's government owes 4 times the amount of money that the entire economy generates in one year (2006).

- $8.507 trillion: the reported (official) US government debt level.
~ $53 trillion: the US government's total reported liabilities/debts.
~ $20 trillion: total debt only six years ago in 2000 (200% GDP at the time).
~ $4.5 trillion: debt added in just the last 12 months.

For comparison's sake, the UK is running at 103% GDP debt, which is a little under $3 trillion US dollars. 103% of GDP is a lot better than our 403% of GDP, however.

What will this mean?

1. Economic growth cannot absolve this debt because the baby boomers will begin retiring in 2008.

2. Standards of living will be lower. Entitlements decrease and taxes will increase, which lowers the standard of living. Maybe Wal-Mart can save us.

3. Historically, every government facing this reality has opted to inflate the currency, which is a 'hidden' tax on everyone.



The US federal government is not bankrupt (which means that not everyone can be paid), but it is insolvent. There is not enough money coming in to pay future obligations. It is troubling, and even though we Americans tend to sincerely believe in American exceptionalism, the dollar is not immune to foolish political decisions.

82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaddyuk From Wallis and Futuna, joined Nov 2001, 4126 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2605 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
There is not enough money coming in to pay future obligations

This completely depends on what length of term these loans were taken out against... correct?



Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
User currently offlineQueso From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2600 times:

So what? Everything is ticking along nicely, people are employed and making money, infrastructure continues to be improved and the economy is growing. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride.

User currently offlineLeezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2597 times:

Maybe they should try spending a little less on defense :-

http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolit...litarySpendingVersusRestoftheWorld

 Smile



"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
User currently offlineKaddyuk From Wallis and Futuna, joined Nov 2001, 4126 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2593 times:

Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 3):
Maybe they should try spending a little less on defense :-

Dont you mean attack...?



Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
User currently offlineIlikeyyc From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1373 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2587 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):

I think that is a little narrow minded. If the government is spending money on something that won't give them a return on their investment, then yes we do have a big problem. But if we are spending money on things that will help the economy (such as infrastructure) that will give give us a return on our money, then the future doesn't look so bleak.



Fighting Absurdity with Absurdity!
User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2577 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Thread starter):
It is troubling, and even though we Americans tend to sincerely believe in American exceptionalism, the dollar is not immune to foolish political decisions.

Of which political decisions do you refer?

If you are referring to the 40 year old "War on Poverty" than I agree with you.

Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 3):
Maybe they should try spending a little less on defense

Defense is the ONE think in the budget that is CONSTITUTIONALLY mandated. And so long as the world looks to the US, in times of trouble, then we will end up spending a lot of money on defense.

BTW the Defense budget as a percentage of GDP is 4%. Lower than it has ever been. During the Cold war in the 50s and 60s it was 9%. Ronald Reagan brought it up to 6% after the Vietnam era gutted it. Clinton lowered it to close to 3%. Bush has raised it back to 4%.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9166 posts, RR: 29
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2571 times:

Quoting Queso (Reply 2):
So what? Everything is ticking along nicely, people are employed and making money, infrastructure continues to be improved and the economy is growing. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride.

Exactly. But don't forget to pay the electricity bill, if someone pulls the plug it's gonna be freezin' cold up there on that rollercoaster.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2556 times:

Didn't we have this discussion last month? It's idiotic.

And where does it say the G is insolvent, except in the original poster's mind?

Not in the article.

You're all fools....what do you think Guttenberg invented the printing press for?

Nobody's going to turn off anything. We've always lived beyond our means.

Sammy Davis Jr. said it best: "You only come this way once, you might as well do it in a Cadillac."


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21411 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2556 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 7):
But don't forget to pay the electricity bill, if someone pulls the plug it's gonna be freezin' cold up there on that rollercoaster.

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2553 times:

And so long as the world looks to the US, in times of trouble, then we will end up spending a lot of money on defense.

Not sure what's more frightening - the extent to which you believe this is actually still the case or the extent to which the defense establishment has been hijacked by those with interests very different from what you yourself believe.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2541 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 10):
Not sure what's more frightening - the extent to which you believe this is actually still the case or the extent to which the defense establishment has been hijacked by those with interests very different from what you yourself believe.

Ok sure.

The next time there is a tsunami and UA makes the humanitarian aide drops you let me know.

When there is an earthquake in the third world and people need tents and supplies it comes out of the entitlements part of the budget or what?

Lets disengage from the world and go back to the pre-World War II isolationism, because Aaron747 and Leezyjet think the US spends too much on defense. We'll let the rest of the world take care of North Korea, and Iran, and Darfur, just like the World took care of Rwanda, when the US didn't. Just like the World got involved in the famine in Somalia when the US didn't. Look how France jumped up to provide troops in Lebanon. Yeah, they want to be a world leader, their first pledge was 200 troops, way to go. If Italy hadn't embarrassed them into providing more they would have gotten away with it too.

Who's being naive?


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2538 times:

You've succeeded admirably in changing the context entirely. Reread, check your comprehension, then reply again.


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2526 times:

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 11):
The next time there is a tsunami and UA makes the humanitarian aide drops you let me know.

When there is an earthquake in the third world and people need tents and supplies it comes out of the entitlements part of the budget or what?

Lets disengage from the world and go back to the pre-World War II isolationism, because Aaron747 and Leezyjet think the US spends too much on defense. We'll let the rest of the world take care of North Korea, and Iran, and Darfur, just like the World took care of Rwanda, when the US didn't. Just like the World got involved in the famine in Somalia when the US didn't. Look how France jumped up to provide troops in Lebanon. Yeah, they want to be a world leader, their first pledge was 200 troops, way to go. If Italy hadn't embarrassed them into providing more they would have gotten away with it too.

Who's being naive?

Maybe you? Just to avoid misconceptions - I'm all for US aid and I appreciate it. Your post sounds that you believe US does everything and the rest of the world doesn't care. Do you really think the US provides more aid (as a percentage of GDP) to third world than the majority of the OECD nations? And btw you're mixing aid with military spending.
Concerning the Middle East - do you really want to open that can of worms? A little less US engagement there during the last 5 years wouldn't have hurt - would it?
Who will be hurt most by new isolationism? Your interests or the rest of the world?
But in the end it's you who has to decide how your money is spend.
It's unfortunate for the rest of the world that a weak or even collapsing Dollar will affect the everyone.

pelican

P.S, I don't think the US military spending is a big problem for the Dollar.


User currently offlineSpeedbird747BA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2496 times:

Quoting Pelican (Reply 13):
Maybe you? Just to avoid misconceptions - I'm all for US aid and I appreciate it. Your post sounds that you believe US does everything and the rest of the world doesn't care

No Im saying that Europe, with a 1000000000+ population doesnt do NERE as much for the world as the US does.

Quoting Pelican (Reply 13):
US provides more aid (as a percentage of GDP) to third world than the majority of the OECD nations

Didnt say that, but the US DOES provide more aid by the means of people on the ground. Money doesnt help too much when it cant get into the country.

Quoting Pelican (Reply 13):
And btw you're mixing aid with military spending.

Yeah, thats because the military spends a good bit of military budget doing humanitarian things, look at Somalia, look at Liberia.

Fact is, the military has been extremely strained for 16 years, and its taking its tolls.

Cheers,
Kyle


User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

Quoting Pelican (Reply 13):
ybe you? Just to avoid misconceptions - I'm all for US aid and I appreciate it. Your post sounds that you believe US does everything and the rest of the world doesn't care. Do you really think the US provides more aid (as a percentage of GDP) to third world than the majority of the OECD nations? And btw you're mixing aid with military spending.
Concerning the Middle East - do you really want to open that can of worms? A little less US engagement there during the last 5 years wouldn't have hurt - would it?
Who will be hurt most by new isolationism? Your interests or the rest of the world?
But in the end it's you who has to decide how your money is spend.
It's unfortunate for the rest of the world that a weak or even collapsing Dollar will affect the everyone.

pelican

P.S, I don't think the US military spending is a big problem for the Dollar.

This entire thread offends me mightily.

I mean, don't get me wrong. The G spends too much money that it doesn't have, there's a trade imbalance, the value of the dollar is declining (as it does, periodically, although nobody wants to address the notion that the Euro is overvalued) and there's a very expensive war on that was a huge mistake plus we spend too much money (that we have to borrow) on the military.

This we all know, but it is not news....repeat after me, nothing new here. Nothing.

But what this thread threatens to become, like every one that raises these same old tired canards is a cumfest of moral superiority and improvident and sophomoric political commentary from who knows where.

It'll soon degenerate into a war between the rednecks and the commielibs on one level while our European counterparts snicker in their lattes as we beat each other over our moronic heads.

We've said all this before. It's moronic and redundant. Don't you people get tired of the same old shit, for Christ's sake?

Do any of you care enough about this issue to write your congressman? Well? Oh, I forgot...most of you do not have Congressmen because you're not local folks.

So why in the hell are you so interested about this subject?

Because you're getting your rocks off. Again.

Grow up and get a life, people. Find something useful to say. Help an old lady across the street. Adopt a stray cat. Put some money in the Sally's kettle. Buy coffee for a guy just out of prison and down on his luck. Go to church and thank G-d you've got a home and enough to eat.

Find something obnoxious to bitch about in in your own neighborhood and your own country, for heaven's sake, instead of the incessant and offensive tirade that this thread will soon become unless I'm greatly mistaken.

You've got plenty of messes at home to talk about, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Stick to your damned knitting.

And Merry Christmas to you, too.


 grumpy   grumpy   grumpy   grumpy   grumpy 


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2440 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 15):

Stick to your damned knitting.

Personally, I'm a student of the Austrian school of economics. I don't knit but I can sew on a button if I have to.


User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2434 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 16):
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 15):

Stick to your damned knitting.

Personally, I'm a student of the Austrian school of economics. I don't knit but I can sew on a button if I have to.

Verrrrrrrry intereschtink...and not schtoopid at all.

The admonition to "stick to one's knitting", of course, simply means in a nice way, "take care of your own shit before you start busting other people's chops about theirs"

That was directed at the usual suspects, which is one reason that I change my flag like other folks change their socks....it's connected with whom I'm trying to annoy at the time LOL.

Doesn't it seem silly to you that folks in other parts of the world spend so much time obsessing about events stateside, and so little time in listening to what we have to say?

I'm reminded of an introductory literature survey class at BU I happened to attend one day...the class had several hundred freshmen in an auditorium...the prof was talking about the significnace of a piece of modern poetry and a guy gets up in the eighth row or so and says "You're completely wrong! That's not right at all!" The prof says "And who might you be?" The guy says "I wrote that!" Whereupon the prof says "You're the last person we want to hear from!" and resumes his lecture.

That describes the usual suspects to a T.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2406 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 17):
Whereupon the prof says "You're the last person we want to hear from!"

That last person he wanted to hear from, at least. I'll bet the students wanted to hear from the actual author.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 17):
The admonition to "stick to one's knitting", of course, simply means in a nice way, "take care of your own shit before you start busting other people's chops about theirs"

I know. The whole "the US should/shouldn't police the world" is definately overdiscussed on this forum.


User currently offlineBushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

Quoting Queso (Reply 2):
So what? Everything is ticking along nicely, people are employed and making money, infrastructure continues to be improved and the economy is growing. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride.

I think the folks were saying the same thing back in the 1928

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 11):
We'll let the rest of the world take care of North Korea, and Iran, and Darfur, just like the World took care of Rwanda, when the US didn't.

Yeah because we are really doing a lot about NK, Iran and Darfur. NK detonated a nuclear bomb. Iran has refused to stop trying to build one, and AFAIK Darfur is still in the midst of chaos. Not to mention Iraq.

Quoting Pelican (Reply 13):
I don't think the US military spending is a big problem for the Dollar.

I would agree. But with only this part of your post really.

UALPHLCS does make some good points that military spending is mandatory. He also makes nice points about entitlement spending. It would have been much wiser to set up social security like how the Alaska Permanent fund is. But also congress has dipped thier hands into that pot so many times it is a joke.

What the major problem has been is that for the last 6 years the GOP has gone on a spending spree of epic proportions and the President has provided zero, nill, zip, notta, nothing in terms of oversight on this. Our trade deficit with the world especially China is worrysome. The outsourcing of jobs is not healthy. Why the hell am I getting a call from India to sell me a credit card?
Our reliance on foreign oil is really bad.
I would agree that the economy is clipping along at a nice pace right now. But what concerns me is the future. Government spending needs to get reigned in PDQ.


User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 19):
Our reliance on foreign oil is really bad.

What saves your "economic ass" right now is other countries' reliance on that same oil and particularly the fact that it is mandatory to pay for it in US dollars.

People often boast about how solid the U.S. economy is and how much the U.S. is 'helping' other nations by buying their goods and services, but they often forget (or worse, they aren't aware of it at all) that these nations simply have to do business with the U.S. it they want to obtain the obligatory currency with which to buy their own oil. Since the U.S. dollar is no longer backed by an equivalent amount of gold (in essence, it is backed by oil now), this means that the U.S. can simply print all the money it wants and have huge trade deficits as long as two conditions are met: 1) global demand for oil continues to increase, and 2) the U.S. dollar remains the obligatory currency in the global oil market.

From a pure U.S. perspective, there really isn't much to worry about when it comes to the different deficits being mentioned. The demand for oil continues to be increasing and as long as the conditions mentioned above are met, the U.S. economy will continue to benefit from whatever emerging economy with an increasing appetite for oil, as long as they pay for that oil in hard U.S. dollars.

From a foreign perspective, it is obvious that many nations would like to get rid of the mandatory U.S. dollar usage in their oil-trading and apply the direct benefits of such a change to their own economies. Different oil-exporting nations have already converted some of their U.S. dollars reserves to Euros and the latest, not unimportant development is that Iran now sells its oil also in Euros and aims to eventually drop the U.S. dollar alltogether.

In my personal opinion, the threat to the U.S. economy is not so much its' reliance on foreign oil but much more its' reliance on the dollar as the sole oil trading currency globally. More and more Middle Eastern governments openly daring to discuss an eventual switch to another (non-U.S. dollar) currency coupled with an ever increasing instable Middle East where longstanding 'petrodollar' allies such as the Saudi royal family are becoming increasingly unpopular, are a much higher threat to the U.S. economy (and U.S. standards of living) than its' dependence on oil.

It could be argued that the current state of affairs in the world (Iraq, Iran) can be directly linked to a U.S. Government trying to maintain the hegemony of the U.S. dollar globally, the U.S. dollar in oil-trading specifically, and the U.S. economy in general. But that's an entire different discussion!  Smile



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineBushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2347 times:

Quoting Schoenorama (Reply 20):

Very interesting and informative, thanks.


User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2342 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 15):
This entire thread offends me mightily.

So why do you quote me? I haven't started it... Have you even read my post before you quoted it? Probably not...

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 19):

UALPHLCS does make some good points that military spending is mandatory.

Problem is that he mixes military spending with aid for third world countries. Which is most of the time a different thing. And I believe the share of such help to third world nations is only a tiny fraction of the US-military budget.
And - as I said before - it (the US military budget) is your (US) business. I just can't stand this uninformed attitude which is ignorant of the rest of the world - which argues "we have to spend so much because the rest of the world does nothing". Why do we Germans send troops to Afghanistan of the coast of Lebanon and the Horn of Africa, Congo (until today), the Balkans.
Why do we provide aid to Iraq?

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 15):

You've got plenty of messes at home to talk about, unless I'm very much mistaken.

See above.

Quoting Speedbird747BA (Reply 14):
No Im saying that Europe, with a 1000000000+ population doesn't do NERE as much for the world as the US does.

Yeah and this is my problem - because it's BS! Since when do we (Europeans) have a 1000.000.000+ population? Get some information before you post! The EU has ~463.000.000. The whole continent has about 700.000.000 -depending on which countries you include. And many of those countries (in the East) aren't wealthy enough to make major contributions to aid other nations.

Quoting Speedbird747BA (Reply 14):
Didnt say that, but the US DOES provide more aid by the means of people on the ground. Money doesnt help too much when it cant get into the country.

Can you elaborate a little more on this?

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 15):
And Merry Christmas to you, too.

Thanks, Merry Christmas to you, too!

pelican


User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2330 times:

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 21):
Very interesting and informative, thanks.

I figured that perhaps you'd like to read the following article: http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html Although the mentioned Iranian Oil Bourse is still not active, the article does give a good understanding of the importance of the petrodollar.



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21411 posts, RR: 54
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2317 times:

Quoting Schoenorama (Reply 20):
In my personal opinion, the threat to the U.S. economy is not so much its' reliance on foreign oil but much more its' reliance on the dollar as the sole oil trading currency globally.

In this context it is difficult to ignore the fact that one of Saddam Hussein's "biggest crimes" was his open defiance towards the petro-dollar when he ostentatiously switched Iraq to oil billing in €uro. (Kim Jong Il may be a much more evil dictator, but he neither had any oil nor did he ever try to question the US$ monopoly. Of course he's still unscathed!)

It doesn't need mentioning that the US invasion saw a timely end to that. Iraq is now back on board with obediently billing in US$ again...

Coincidence? Yeah, sure!  crazy 


25 Post contains images Dougloid : Yes...I read your post quite carefully. It was a mere starting point for my rant. Did you read my rant? Probably not. Did anyone read it? Probably no
26 Post contains images Klaus : Unless you're a single child who refuses to go outside, you'll have to deal with people looking at you. Fortunately, you're allowed - even expected -
27 Dougloid : I have an answer to this whole issue.... It's going to be called "The Schadenfreude Project" We're all going to gang up on a country selected at rando
28 Post contains images Klaus : I think you really misunderstand what's going on. A bit like a single child who feels mortally insulted by the perfectly normal interchange among a g
29 Aaron747 : Just a simple question Doug: ever lived abroad? I have for awhile now, and let me tell ya - nothing is more critical in the long run than listening to
30 Schoenorama : What is your problem, Dougloid? I've read your little rant in reply #15 and it is pretty obvious that your opinion on the purposes of a discussion-boa
31 Post contains images Klaus : The point being that rather few people abroad actually think as badly of americans per se as many americans apparently fear - most people abroad thin
32 Post contains images Baroque : Go on Douggie, you would go and sulk in a corner if we really ignored you! Why else would the US make such a pig's breakfast of Iraq - just good old
33 Petertenthije : The trick of the petro-dollar is that by pricing all oil/gas in dollars, the combined world's oil/gas resources can be considered the US's. With that
34 Dougloid : No, I haven't lived outside the United States. Rather, I'm like the man who had never been to Mississippi and wasn't the worse for the experience. I
35 Schoenorama : Wow! First things first: funny how you accuse people of not wanting to listen to informed, reasonably well educated people on this issue when your pa
36 Post contains images Leezyjet : So basically what you are saying is that we are doing in this thread exactly what the US does to everyone else except we are on a much smaller scale
37 Dougloid : Sorry...you guys weigh in on every slugfest...it's always the same, it never changes, and you get offended when I call you out on it...show me I'm wr
38 UALPHLCS : No I think the US does a lot and the rest of the world resents it. We still have troops in South Korea. Which is why I mentioned it. Would South Kore
39 Schoenorama : Where is the slugfest in this particular discussion? There is none! You are the only one here imagining such slugfest but if you'd actually bothered
40 Jalto27R : America's Doomed! The dollar is doomed! Most of Europe's economy might suck, but hell, America's can't last much longer at the pace it is going. Doome
41 Cfalk : As GDP was over $12 trillion in 2005, I suggest you take some remedial math. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html[Ed
42 Cedarjet : Just what I always say - I'm sure the good people of Argentina, Indonesia etc thought they were immune from bad economic policies too, but the US eco
43 Aaron747 : Japan is the country it is because 90% of it's defense is the US military. Either way South Korea owes its industrialization to the US military What h
44 UALPHLCS : Hmmmm where do people get these ideas? This is why I think a true isolationist policy for a few years would be great. Just a simple with drawl from a
45 Post contains images Aaron747 : So completely wrong on so many levels...the only thing you've got right is the defense dollars spent on these countries, but as to the why, how, or w
46 Schoenorama : How comes it that the US is able to have such huge military expenditures in the first place? How come the US is able, year in year out, to have incre
47 Cfalk : I have degrees in economics, accounting and finance, and I can't understand your logic. That's the kind of pseudo-economics that Marxists and leftist
48 PanHAM : Ride a bike or walk if you don't like it. No, you should discuss your thesis with an Economics Professor. He will tell you what eventully happens if
49 Post contains links Schoenorama : I think I explained in quite a comprehensible way. Nice Cfalk. Why don't you just try to discuss the arguments as others have done? Surely, for someo
50 UALPHLCS : AS Mentioned the US has the largest economy in the world an economy that produces more of what the world wants to buy. You are not FORCED to by Ameri
51 Aloges : If you mention that, you must also mention the geostrategic importance of that aid. While the Marshall Plan was and still is much appreciated, it did
52 Schoenorama : Wrong on two accounts: the US does NOT have the largest economy in the world and it does NOT produce more than the world wants to buy. No, but I am F
53 Dougloid : Another self appointed expert lecturing the Americans. Yes indeed, Chicken Little. The sky IS falling, as everyone here knows because they read about
54 Schoenorama : Nice to see we do occassionally have things in common.
55 PPVRA : I think he meant the USA produces lots of products the world wants to buy, not that there is a surplus in production.
56 Post contains images Aaron747 : Those that criticize US spending lack the understanding that their countries priorities are able to be maintained BECAUSE the US spends so much. We to
57 Post contains images Schoenorama : Your right, I read that sentence wrong. Heck, I even did so when typing my initial reply to you! My apologies to UALPHLCS for that and thanks to you
58 MD-90 : Is it hypocrisy when he has no choice but to pay the taxes that fund the such welfare largess? Government, after all, is but a gun to the head forcin
59 Dougloid : that was a localism that you completely misunderstood, which shows you aren't familiar with our idioms or our wit. Gotcha there.....you're misinforme
60 PanHAM : very simple - by offering US$ treasuries. Assume oil or any other commodity is traded in € and oil producing nationas are sitting on a wealth of Eu
61 Post contains links Schoenorama : I am aware of the whole issue of treasuries: I noted so myself in reply 49. And since you and I apparently agree on the issue of US Treasuries, I can
62 Post contains links Baroque : Which brings in mention of a certain type of scheme http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme "Some free-market economists, such as Thomas Sowell hav
63 MD-90 : The dollar's status as the world's reserve currency is very beneficial for the US, and the fact that oil is denominated in dollars is also good for th
64 Dougloid : Sowell hardly represents mainstream economic thought, and wikipedia is a compromised and largely anecdotal resource. If you're going to continue to g
65 MD-90 : Considering how PC and Keynesian most economists are, that's not a bad thing. I have a lot of respect for Thomas Sowell, although during the Bush yea
66 VonRichtofen : So some oil producing countries are now selling their oil in other currencies. I wonder what would happen if Canada (the world's second largest oil ex
67 Baroque : Many Marxists believe in realpolitik so they would not have been interested in war with guns and such like, but what we see now, the ongoing economic
68 Post contains images Klaus : Natural Plutonium resources...? I'd be quite surprised to hear that!
69 Post contains links Schoenorama : Are you sure about Canada being the world's second largest oil exporter? The CIA World Factbook puts Canada in 10th place? (1) Aren't you mixing up t
70 Post contains links UALPHLCS : True the Marshall Plan as aid was good strategic politics. It served US interests to have A strong Western Europe as allies. And At the time they wer
71 Aaron747 : That is so revisionist it's not even worth commenting on. The late Dwight Eisenhower would disagree with you. At any rate you should be the last perso
72 UALPHLCS : Well, Dwight Eisenhower can be wrong. It's more the first part of your statement that was revisionist, and I assume what you are saying is related to
73 Post contains images Dougloid : Good catch brother...glad to see you stayed awake in physics class too.
74 Dougloid : What's the problem with Keynesian economics? I mean, when people are making lots of money you tax them and put it in the kitty. When times are hard,
75 Post contains images Klaus : Always ready to annoy people on every front...!
76 AerospaceFan : From the original source, The End of Money Website, cited above: (Excerpt) See: November 3, 2006 entry from that site. Does anyone else find the quote
77 Post contains links Dougloid : Yes....it's because the quote is malarkey. Gold, silver or 'any other commodity priced in dollars'? If you want to take your money and put it out the
78 MD-90 : Politicians.
79 Dougloid : OK...next question. There will never be life without them. There never has been. So....because politicians are part of the landscape, is it better to
80 Post contains links Baroque : http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/.../will_the_dam_break_in_2007_1.html Stiglitz does not seem to be in a happy mood for the New Year! Must have eat
81 Post contains links and images Dougloid : http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/.../will_the_dam_break_in_2007_1.html It's editorial commentary....mere bloggery. I can drum up just as many peopl
82 Baroque : These Nobel prizewinners like Stiglitz just have no care for evidence and so many of them are just writing blogs now, you would scarcely believe it. I
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Capping Of Punitive Damages In The United States posted Tue Apr 11 2006 18:29:22 by SATX
Gino Vannelli Comes To The United States! posted Sat Apr 8 2006 15:42:18 by Superfly
John Hanson, First President Of The United States posted Thu Dec 1 2005 15:26:56 by Falcon84
American? The United States? posted Mon May 30 2005 17:53:06 by N506CR
Proud Of The United States Armed Forces posted Wed Jan 5 2005 23:30:26 by JeffLAS
To The United States Of America, Nov. 2nd, 2004. posted Sun Oct 3 2004 10:31:50 by 747-600X
Hamas Thinking Of Striking The United States posted Mon Jul 19 2004 21:48:12 by Yanksn4
The United States Has A Major Crisis Every 70 Yrs posted Fri May 21 2004 09:57:44 by MD-90
Best Looking Presidents Of The United States posted Tue Dec 30 2003 02:44:21 by Gocaps16
Actual Wars Of The United States posted Tue Apr 1 2003 04:55:44 by Saab340