• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the top reason for the current US economic problem?

What is te top reason for the current US economic criss?

  • Our workforce is not qualified enough to demand high paying jobs in science and technology

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Healthcare reform

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    50
This is a fixed , rigged poll, thus "no vote".
Greed, of course, is the obvious answer....IMO...
Krhazy may have the best answer.
 
That's definitely not true.
The expectations of individuals is higher than that.

You could build an insulated "shed" home, on 1 acre or less, with electricity and plumbing, on the cheap.
It's just that most people don't want to do that.

For the sake of honesty put some thought into your posts. How would our civilization function if tens (if not hundreds) of millions of people were living like that?
 
Last edited:
For the sake of honesty put some thought into your posts. How would our civilization function if tens (if not hundreds) of millions of people were living like that?

Do people not function in smaller homes? :lol:

People want more walls, rooms, etc, things get more expensive.
It's a personal choice to live the way you do.
Living in a smaller home, does not change the dynamics of civilization.
 
Our economy doesn't provide any other options. There are, for example, no "cheap" residences in any substantial sense, whether you are renting or mortgaging.

We pay $350/month for singlewide 2 bedroom mobile home on about a 1/4 acre lot.
 
For the sake of honesty put some thought into your posts. How would our civilization function if tens (if not hundreds) of millions of people were living like that?

What makes you think that we are not? Nobody NEEDS 3,000 square feet of living space. The bigger the house the more it costs to furnish, heat and cool. A mobile home is fine, it keeps us quite comfortable and out of the weather, mission accomplished.
 
What makes you think that we are not? Nobody NEEDS 3,000 square feet of living space. The bigger the house the more it costs to furnish, heat and cool. A mobile home is fine, it keeps us quite comfortable and out of the weather, mission accomplished.

A lot of people snub their noses at mobile homes, but we used to rent a double wide, on 40 acres, for $500 a month.
Functionally it's just like a house.
 
I pay $430, for a 10 year old house, 3 bed, 2.5 bath, in a nice neighborhood.
1/4th an acre too.

We are looking at a 7 year old doublewide for sale in town on 1 acre for $59K, if the oldest daughter will buy it (as an investment). At 58 & 60 we would rent it from her and maintain the place, but at our ages it makes little sense to buy anything for ourselves.
 
Last edited:
A lot of people snub their noses at mobile homes, but we used to rent a double wide, on 40 acres, for $500 a month.
Functionally it's just like a house.

a double-size trailer IS a house, and can look lovely.

it just seems complicated to buy land, install the foundation, install the trailer, get a water/electric hookup, and what about sewer??
 
a double-size trailer IS a house, and can look lovely.

it just seems complicated to buy land, install the foundation, install the trailer, get a water/electric hookup, and what about sewer??

Depends on where you are.
Wells cost $$$$, but if county water is near by, it's much cheaper.
Septic can cost $$$$ but if county sewer is near, much cheaper.

Grading, foundation, etc, can be expensive, but if you shop it (especially in this economy) you can get a good deal.
A lot of mobile home sellers can coordinate this for you.
 
Do people not function in smaller homes? :lol:

People want more walls, rooms, etc, things get more expensive.
It's a personal choice to live the way you do.
Living in a smaller home, does not change the dynamics of civilization.

You are aware that "more walls, rooms, etc" are the only things setting us apart from the Dark Ages? The fact people want and are capable of such things is what spurs the technological and economic advancement of civilization to begin with.

If your proposal became the cultural and economic norm for avoiding the private debt that is plunging the middle class into poverty, expect the following consequences:

(1) Housing sector utterly destroyed
(2) Financing sector heavily damaged
(3) All venture capitalism destroyed as a result of (2)
(4) Broader economic recession due to (1), (2), and (3) to a lesser extent
(4) Increased social unrest due to perceptions that the political and economic elite forced the general population to such extremes to survive in accordance with pre-existing trends, as well as to capture a larger share of what can still be had
(5) Bigger, more intrusive government to address an increasingly unruly and transient population
(6) Disorder on an international scale due to the recessions and political upheaval in the nation with the greatest influence in the world
(7) American enemies and rivals suffer themselves, but also make military, economic, and diplomatic strides in the power vaccum -- both due to (6), paving the way for a formation of a world order very hostile to a vastly weakened United States

Pretty much everything about the "New World Order" depends on Americans not just wanting to "beat the Joneses", but also being able to do it.
 
Last edited:
We are looking at a 7 year old doublewide for sale in town on 1 acre for $59K, if the oldest daughter will buy it (as an investment). At 58 & 60 we would rent it from her and maintain the place, but at our ages it makes little sense to buy anything for ourselves.

That's not a bad price.
My in laws tried to unload that trailer on us for $70k plus moving it.
They had to sell the land.

I definitely walked on that deal.
 
Lack of greatness. We, as a country, have lost the will to succeed.

No, we haven't lost the will to succeed, we've lost any interest in competing. We think that we ought to be handed first prize just for bothering to show up. Nobody understands that what made America great was that we outproduced and outworked everyone else. We're too lazy to do that today.
 
Poll: What is te top reason for the current US economic criss?
Tax rates on job creators are too high.
Technology has eliminated many jobs
Our workforce is not qualified enough to demand high paying jobs in science and technology
Competition with cheap overseas labor
Healthcare reform
Too much regulation on business
Too little regulation on business
Barack Obama

[x] An ongoing financial crisis in Europe, made worse by a vindictive German government and an ECB committed to doing a horrible job, continues to drag down markets all around the world.
 
No, we haven't lost the will to succeed, we've lost any interest in competing. We think that we ought to be handed first prize just for bothering to show up. Nobody understands that what made America great was that we outproduced and outworked everyone else. We're too lazy to do that today.

The prize for competing and working hard was extremely clear to both of my grandfathers and their generations.

The same situation is not in effect today. When my maternal grandfather worked in manufacturing and eventually rose to plant supervisor, the position came with a number of benefits that justified the work he put into his job. Now the position and the benefits are either gone from employment or vanishing. Nowadays hard work is anticipated from employees as a matter of course.

Very problematic. Various aspects of the American economy don't fit with globalism and other trends. The result is decay and then chaos.
 
Last edited:
The prize for competing and working hard was extremely clear to both of my grandfathers and their generations.

The same situation is not in effect today.

Of course not, America has been liberalized. We don't have to work for anything anymore, the government gives it to us for free just for waking up in the morning. They owe us everything.
 
You are aware that "more walls, rooms, etc" are the only things setting us apart from the Dark Ages? The fact people want and are capable of such things is what spurs the technological and economic advancement of civilization to begin with.

First part is just laughable.

People being able to think forwardly is what spurs economic advancement and technology.
Having multi-room, expansive homes is a luxury.

If your proposal became the cultural and economic norm for avoiding the private debt that is plunging the middle class into poverty, expect the following consequences:

(1) Housing sector utterly destroyed
(2) Financing sector heavily damaged
(3) All venture capitalism destroyed as a result of (2)
(4) Broader economic recession due to (1), (2), and (3) to a lesser extent
(4) Increased social unrest due to perceptions that the political and economic elite forced the general population to such extremes to survive in accordance with pre-existing trends, as well as to capture a larger share of what can still be had
(5) Bigger, more intrusive government to address an increasingly unruly and transient population
(6) Disorder on an international scale due to the recessions and political upheaval in the nation with the greatest influence in the world
(7) American enemies and rivals suffer themselves, but also make military, economic, and diplomatic strides in the power vaccum -- both due to (6), paving the way for a formation of a world order very hostile to a vastly weakened United States

Pretty much everything about the "New World Order" depends on Americans not just wanting to "beat the Joneses", but also being able to do it.

Yea that's just a bunch of conspiracy theory nonsense.
 
First part is just laughable.

Oh. Brilliantly argued. You showed me.

People being able to think forwardly is what spurs economic advancement and technology.

Tautology. Or truism, to be less philosophical. Either way a red herring.

Having multi-room, expansive homes is a luxury.

Red herring. The housing industry and how it is priced, functions, and relates to the rest of the economy is too elaborate for these kinds of simple morals.

Yea that's just a bunch of conspiracy theory nonsense.

The skillfulness of these arguments humbles us all.

If a few million people defaulting on their home loans sends the interrelated housing and banking industries (both being part of the financing sector) to the edge of bankruptcy (circa 2008), and that sends the global economy into a persistent recession that hasn't lifted 4 years later, then what do you think the consequences would be if even ten million people decided to avoid participating in the industry to steer clear of the private debt that ensues from becoming involved with it? If a simple recession causes the formation of a grassroots movements and protests, then wouldn't the consequences of a more economically damaging development have correspondingly more dangerous parallels? Especially when these same cycles have occurred in human history countless times.

There is no mystery or "conspiracy" here (you seem to fail to understand what a conspiracy is, since I wasn't assigning agency or responsibility to a specific covert organization -- a more sensible insult would be "alarmist nonsense"). It's how civilization functions.

I'm not even going to get into the fact the crediting industry would fail, another blow to the financing sector that forms such a large part of our economy.
 
Last edited:
The coercive market distortion encouraging consumption and debt.
 
Oh. Brilliantly argued. You showed me.

Correct, the argument you presented was so retarded, all I could do was laugh.

Tautology. Or truism, to be less philosophical. Either way a red herring.

Yes.
You want quality yet you post nonsense.

Red herring. The housing industry and how it is priced, functions, and relates to the rest of the economy is too elaborate for these kinds of simple morals.

Suggesting that some people buy smaller homes, is some how going to tank the whole economy and throw the world in chaos.
Your argument was completely and utterly ridiculous, so much so, that you had to go to extremes in order to make it.


The skillfulness of these arguments humbles us all.

If a few million people defaulting on their home loans sends the interrelated housing and banking industries (both being part of the financing sector) to the edge of bankruptcy (circa 2008), and that sends the global economy into a persistent recession that hasn't lifted 4 years later, then what do you think the consequences would be if even ten million people decided to avoid participating in the industry to steer clear of the private debt that ensues from becoming involved with it?

I'm not even going to get into the fact the crediting industry would fail, another blow to the financing sector that forms such a large part of our economy.

It creates a new industry of smaller home purchases.
The fact is, people don't need multi-room, expansive homes to function.

You're argument was completely ridiculous.
 
Back
Top Bottom