Hey, where is Nick Danger anyway?
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
Hey, where is Nick Danger anyway?
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
boink for later.
This is a bunch of horse manure.
A big steaming pile, in fact.
Wasteful spending and pork are still wasteful spending and pork when someone with an "R" after his name does it.
War is peace. Slavery is freedom. An uncontrolled spending spree is fiscal conservatism.
Interesting read. Not sure if I buy into the thesis, especially since it posits that George Chaucey Gardiner Bush could think through something so non-obvious, but it's food for thought.
Frankly, I think the world is seeing the ease with which the US can simply print money and it is showing up in commodity prices, eg gold and oil
So without going into lengthy discussion, yeah, the juicy game you outline appears to be working for the moment but it's in many ways dependent upon the kindness of strangers, some of whom may well have questionable motives on a long term basis.
As for the OPEC component of generating this magic cash, our ever expanding economy depends in many ways upon cheap [refined] oil. That too apears more and more tenuous as things progress here. I will admit to being very wrong as to the resiliency of the US consumer over the past few years. Today, OPEC accepts our cash for their oil. In some ways, one has to wonder; the Arabs have seen our real estate market double in value, and everybody seems just gag over it. Maybe they feel left out...why shouldn't oil double? Again I say, the game you cite is working just dandy now. It may not always work so well.
Interesting.
I even agree with some sapects of it.
However, the problem is that the federal government is growing out of control and taking over the responsibilities of the states.
If Louisiana wants to use tax dollars to rebuild New Orleans, that's within their authority to do so. Maybe the federal government should help rebuild some bridges and roads, but a better solution would be to cut most of the federal gas tax, and let the states fix their own roads with gas tax revenues instead of the money all going into the federal government's hands where it gets spent on pork.
There are problems that the federal government needs to throw money at. Border security is an exellent example of this, yet it's getting sidelined while Bush throws money at issues that are outside the responsibility given to the federal government in the constitution.
The federal government needs to shrink significantly, and if the people want more government programs, they should see about getting them implemented at the state level.
OK, but I fail to see how larger bureaucracy payrolls earns any 'rate of return'. Also, when the interest rate required to attract investments in U.S. promissory notes raises to, say 10%, then annual interest on our existing 8 trillion of debt amounts to 800 billion ... nearly $11,000 annually for each family of four ... just to cover the interest. No, like IBM, even nations can go belly up.
Please tell me you are joking.
"It's All Strategery" -- Nick Danger, Since Forever
ping for l8er.
Enough of this "we" BS buddy.
It's MY cash. How about letting me say how it's spent?
"The U.S. government borrows it back. Note carefully that our consumers now have the stuff, and our government has the cash. Is this a good deal, or what?"
ummmmmmmmmmmmmm........that would be
No.
WHO winds up paying the INTEREST on this debt?
"Our children are not going to have to pay it back. Institutions are not individuals"
Hooooooookkkkkkkaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy?
What will the tax rate be for a kid (now 10 years old).....when he's 35?
Good post. I actually agree. If you can't beat them, join them. Until a majority of the nation wants less spending, its not gonna happen.
Nearly everyone on FR is for small federal government, and I am too. But that is not gonna happen for years even with a steady conservative agenda. We do have to limit the expansion of federal rights at the expense of states rights, but the Feds can spend plenty without expanding their reach.
Regardless of who spends the money, it goes right into the economy and drives it. I hope eventually we owe China trillions of dollars. Then we can tell them to suck eggs or we won't repay a dime of it. Other nations have done exactly the same to us for years. Turnabout is fair play. Besides limiting their expenditures, it gives us great leverage.
No, you moron, what you'll have when you're done is more people who are used to stuffing themselves to bursting at the government trough.
You've overlooked one thing in your rambleing but entertaining screed.. Dubya just might be a globalist.. and it ALL; from being AWOL on immigration to spending like a drunken Captian Queeg on stawberries.. could have a globalist agenda.. SLAP SLAP, WAKE up Nicky... wake up..
**--------
The one thing everyman fears is the unknown. When presented this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of well being granted to them by World Government. -- Henry Kissinger, Amiens, France, 1991
"We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money," warned Arthur Schlesinger Jr, in the July/August 1995 issue of Foreign Affairs.
I can't imagine George Washington writing this, saying this or even thinking it. Instead, he would be laying flat on his back in a fit of pure apoplexy.
Frankly, I think I prefer to go with the federal government George envisioned and fought for - not some slick accountant's idea of "how can we fool 'em today?".
This is a scheme Richard Ben-Veniste and Bill Clinton would be proud of thinking up - if only they had thought of it first!