Discussion: The Economy, Fiscal Cliff, National Debt, And Other Financial Issues III

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

Wait, this wasn't about Obama letting the Bush era tax cuts expire? Ron Paul actually got the passed a member of the House? I wonder how Obama feels about it?

This has nothing to do with the fight over the Bush era tax cuts and it passed 327 - 98 (all but one Republican and 89 Democrats voted for the bill). Democratic leadership such as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and I'm pretty sure Barack Obama oppose it.

[8wid]

^Why would democrats oppose it?

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by 8wid

^Why would democrats oppose it?

Yes, I wonder why?

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

^Why would democrats oppose it?

Because much of it has to do with the simple fact that giving the Federal Reserve free reign is the closest thing they can do to put out a stimulus through things like Quantitative Easing since an actual stimulus will never pass through Congress due to Republican and conservative Democratic opposition. It would also much more easily expose the massive amounts of corporate welfare that the Federal Reserve supports that Democrats like Barney Frank, Timothy Geithner, and Barack Obama are very much in support of, which is in the trillions. It would make them look bad at a time when they're going off saying how evil corporations are, while they are giving them trillions and trillions of dollars and they get fully exposed.

[Paradoxium]

Housing Headwinds: US Birthrate Lowest in 25 Years as Twenty-Somethings Postpone Having Babies

Good luck on that housing "investment" and paying social security

Cosmic justice from mathematics.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Paradoxium

Housing Headwinds: US Birthrate Lowest in 25 Years as Twenty-Somethings Postpone Having Babies

Good luck on that housing "investment" and paying social security

Cosmic justice from mathematics.

That's what I've been saying for decades in my classes....

It's all about the givers and the takers....when we have more takers than givers...well we are screwed as far as social security....and HERE WEEEEE GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

Takers: Birth -- 18 (and now 26 with Obamacare); 66 - 75 + (AND HEEEEERREEEEE COME THE BABY BOOMERS.....)
Givers: 18 -- 65

I tell my kids in class if they are planning on relying on their Social Security to get them through....they will be extremely disappointed.

We are about to pay the piper.

[8wid]

What could an audit of the Federal Reserve reveal? The continuous printing of money to weaken the dollar is true, there are secret bailouts worth hundreds of billions to trillions going on, there is illegal manipulation of the interest rates in favor of the large banks and certain corporate stock holders, there is massive overspending by the US Federal government for this institution, sole decision making of Federal policies of the US economy are being solely made by a cartel of US corporate banks? Perhaps the current administration seeks to hide this for itself.

If the Obama administration gets exposed helping corporations with trillions in corporate welfare it could mean the end of his chances for reelection?

[Paradoxium]

I predict it will be a clash of the generational divide, not this class warfare some people all so want desperately. A sort of crumbling Gerontocracy war of sorts is more likely.

[8wid]

Or if secret deals have been doing on between the Federal government and large banks for decades and now get exposed it could also cause a run on the banks, financial panic, and at minimum a giant double-dip recession. Not to mention millions of furious people.

[Paradoxium]

The mainstream doesn't understand financialese. Look at the LIBOR fraud story, barely a blip. Not much outrage except from only certain groups of people.

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

What could an audit of the Federal Reserve reveal? The continuous printing of money to weaken the dollar is true, there are secret bailouts worth hundreds of billions to trillions going on, there is illegal manipulation of the interest rates in favor of the large banks and certain corporate stock holders, there is massive overspending by the US Federal government for this institution, sole decision making of Federal policies of the US economy are being solely made by a cartel of US corporate banks? Perhaps the current administration seeks to hide this for itself.

If the Obama administration gets exposed helping corporations with trillions in corporate welfare it could mean the end of his chances for reelection?

Bingo.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Paradoxium

The mainstream doesn't understand financialese. Look at the LIBOR fraud story, barely a blip. Not much outrage except from only certain groups of people.

If it is going to hurt Obama's chance of re-election it will only get a blip on the media radar anyway....whether people understand it or not.

[8wid]

There are real conspiracies going on between the Federal government and the Federal Reserve. If this is true and the Iraq War and the intentional lowering of interest rates to generate massive profits for Wall Street are all conspiracies, then what else could really have been?

Did Bush have his cons buy the 2000 election, did his intentionally ignore the warnings of the 9/11 attacks in August 2001 and allow Osama Bin Laden attack the United States to strike up anti-Islamic sentiment among Americans and intentionally reduce civil rights? Who knows?

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by 8wid

There are real conspiracies going on between the Federal government and the Federal Reserve. If this is true and the Iraq War and the intentional lowering of interest rates to generate massive profits for Wall Street are all conspiracies, then what else could really have been?

Did Bush have his cons buy the 2000 election, did his intentionally ignore the warnings of the 9/11 attacks in August 2001 and allow Osama Bin Laden attack the United States to strike up anti-Islamic sentiment among Americans and intentionally reduce civil rights? Who knows?

You have to look to Clinton for some of that as well, it doesn't just suddenly happen.

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

There are real conspiracies going on between the Federal government and the Federal Reserve. If this is true and the Iraq War and the intentional lowering of interest rates to generate massive profits for Wall Street are all conspiracies, then what else could really have been?

Did Bush have his cons buy the 2000 election, did his intentionally ignore the warnings of the 9/11 attacks in August 2001 and allow Osama Bin Laden attack the United States to strike up anti-Islamic sentiment among Americans and intentionally reduce civil rights? Who knows?

I think that that's taking it too far. There's a difference between wanting to cover up your **** up and just being blatantly evil in an incredibly cartoonish manner.

[8wid]

^Well you have to admit someone made off with a huge prize and conspired to do so. Even if the President didn't someone on Wall Street did.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by 8wid

I don't see Bill Clinton doing much except letting Osama Bin Laden go a few times and rampant up sanctions on Iraq. This is why I wish Al Gore had been President because he would have been experienced and on the dot as Vice-President, actually worked for a time in the White House and been aware of the hunt for Bin Laden. He probably would not have ignored the security intelligence and 9.11 could have been prevented.

Clinton is just as responsible for the slow but sure death of the middle class as Bush.

As for 9/11 being prevented, a bit off topic, but it would've never happened. No president could've implemented the security upgrades needed to prevent 9/11 without it actually happening. The increase in TSA, the sharing of intel between agencies, etc....all of that needed a dramatic event to put the chain of events into motion. Even if 9/11 were prevented, it would've been a small, under the radar thing that the public never heard about. The attack would still have happened eventually. It would've just been 3/15 or 11/22 or some other day.

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

I don't see Bill Clinton doing much except letting Osama Bin Laden go a few times and rampant up sanctions on Iraq. This is why I wish Al Gore had been President because he would have been experienced and on the dot as Vice-President, actually worked for a time in the White House and been aware of the hunt for Bin Laden. He probably would not have ignored the security intelligence and 9.11 could have been prevented.

That is also quite pushing it. I don't think that there is no way to say that 9/11 could have been prevented no matter who was in office. Gore could have taken the concerns just as lightly as the Bush Administration did. And it's not like the Vice President has any real power, he's just a back up that is often just pushed to the side. Gore was often pushed to the side and there was a lot of tension between Clinton and Gore. And it's obvious that Obama has pushed Biden to the side a lot because that man is nothing but a foot in mouth gaffe machine. And if McCain were President, Palin would have been pushed to the side as much as possible.

[8wid]

^That is true, anyone could have hijacked a plane and crashed it into something for decades, America was outdated with Cold War systems because it was complacent.

Clinton did sign the acts needed to create housing, but it took Bush's tax cuts and lowering of interest rates to offset the cost of the Iraq War on the American economy.

[hippie_hunter]

That was the biggest flaw with our security then. We still had a Cold War mentality as opposed to dealing with the world of the 21st Century.

[8wid]

Al-Qaeda is really a product of the Cold War because they were largely strengthened by funding from the CIA during the Soviet War in Afghanistan. Blowback as Ron Paul puts it was a huge issue. That is why chances are in the future another terrorist attack coming from the Middle East will probably be a byproduct of the War on Terror.

[hippie_hunter]

Originally Posted by 8wid

Al-Qaeda is really a product of the Cold War because they were largely strengthened by funding from the CIA during the Soviet War in Afghanistan. Blowback as Ron Paul puts it was a huge issue. That is why chances are in the future another terrorist attack coming from the Middle East will probably be a byproduct of the War on Terror.

However, because of the massive boost in security measures, it is a lot harder to perform another terrorist attack. If there is one, it will most likely be a lot smaller in scale than the one that happened on 9/11.

And another thing to take into account is that the efforts of the Bush and Obama Administrations have pretty much demolished the main al-Qaeda group. It has become a rather ineffective and headless organization due to lack of funds and leadership getting killed off. I would be more fearful of smaller terrorist groups like al-Qaeda affiliates such as al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (although the Obama Administration has been putting a lot of focus on that group) or a group that we just aren't paying much attention to.

[8wid]

Because America is essentially bankrupt now, there will no more US forces galavanting around the planet installing favorable governments like in the Cold War anymore and no more destabilization of countries with their money to achieve their goals and invite in chaos. I would be concerned about terror groups coming out of Iraq and eventually Afghanistan when NATO forces withdrawal, but the Arab Spring seems to be causing these countries to focus on modernizing their nations and resisting Western influence by building themselves up internally. I could see the US eventually removing its bases from the region including Saudi Arabia in the next twenty years because it's not affordable anymore. That was a major motive for Al-Qaeda removed and the primary way America has to cut it's deficit is going to be defense. America will not be a military power anymore.

[hippie_hunter]

I'm not too concerned about Iraq. I'm more concerned about the states of the Arab Spring right now because we have no idea what will become of them and if we treat them the wrong way we could see groups like the Islamic Brotherhood becoming dangerous.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by hippie_hunter

I'm not too concerned about Iraq. I'm more concerned about the states of the Arab Spring right now because we have no idea what will become of them and if we treat them the wrong way we could see groups like the Islamic Brotherhood becoming dangerous.

Have you been to their site on the internet....they ain't exactly passive....AND NOT the US site for them...their site, and get an interpreter...its quite interesting the differences between the 2 sites.