• 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!

U.S. food stamp tally up 1.2 million in two months

ARealConservative said:
the people doing the regulating are equally prone to greed...and now they possess more power.
Click to expand...

How so?

The only example I could think of is if a politician is influenced by personal monetary gains by a lobbyist. That is against the law, though.
 
TheNextEra said:
The conservative mindset is to de-regulate min wage laws so people DO work for those slave wages, but on U.S. ground.
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to ask you to prove that.
 
Middleground said:
How so?

The only example I could think of is if a politician is influenced by personal monetary gains by a lobbyist. That is against the law, though.
Click to expand...

Here's a hint: in the olden days politicians would have real jobs. But the lazy slobs capable of generating votes came in and decided working as a rep was the best job around. Don't have to bend down to pick up stuff, no heavy lifting, no real effort at all except when Congress is in session, the perfect job for lazy, incompetent slobs. If you can't connect the dots between terrible leadership and decades of decline, then you're missing an integral part of the picture. All they have to do is manipulate politics and gain votes for the idiots back home. That's all, there only responsibility is to themselves and their ability to continue getting votes to secure a fantastic lifestyle and retirement. As the base level, that's all anybody really wants and that's all they are seeking in Congress.
 
apdst said:
So, the Liberal answer to the problem is to over-regulate and over-tax these companies so they leave the country and set up shop in countries where are no child labor laws, safe working conditions and can pay workers $2 a week, unemploying millions of American workers.

That makes a helluva lot of sense.
Click to expand...

Huh??? Not sure how you reached that conclusion!

Those companies who wanted to make more profit have gone to these countries. That's nothing against the law, but it does create other problems that need to be solved. Problem that are new, and have no historical action to rely upon.

Wall Street went down because of greed resulting from deregulation. That in itself has bankrupted your country.
 
Middleground said:
Huh??? Not sure how you reached that conclusion!

Those companies who wanted to make more profit have gone to these countries. That's nothing against the law, but it does create other problems that need to be solved. Problem that are new, and have no historical action to rely upon.

Wall Street went down because of greed resulting from deregulation. That in itself has bankrupted your country.
Click to expand...

Actually there's a lot more to it than deregulation. Not even touching on the stuff with the monetary system and the Fed, you still have strong links between members of government and Wall Street. Goldmach Sachs case in point, big time Goldman people running the financial show last year in the Bush administration. And yet, they're still doing and Obama is doing nothing to stop it. Oh Obama, oh Obama the invisible President, where have you gone Obama?
 
Middleground said:
Huh??? Not sure how you reached that conclusion!

Those companies who wanted to make more profit have gone to these countries. That's nothing against the law, but it does create other problems that need to be solved. Problem that are new, and have no historical action to rely upon.
Click to expand...

Not sure how I reached that conclusion? Well, I took a look at reality. That's how...:rofl

Wall Street went down because of greed resulting from deregulation. That in itself has bankrupted your country.
Click to expand...

And, now Liberalism is going to send it right on over the edge.
 
Middleground said:
How so?
Click to expand...

how so what?

Do you think people in charge of regulating are divine or something?

They are equally prone to greed because they are still people.

The only example I could think of is if a politician is influenced by personal monetary gains by a lobbyist. That is against the law, though.
Click to expand...

aaaah....the law.....enforced by men prone to greed, enacted by men prone to greed.
 
Here's how awesome our SEC regulators are: they are so awesome that they themselves are not continually checked for insider trading violations or conflicts of interest, it operates on the honor system.
 
Middleground said:
Wall Street went down because of greed resulting from deregulation. That in itself has bankrupted your country.
Click to expand...

wall street went down because of greed and deregulation? You clearly recite liberal talking points without actually understanding what you are saying.

First off, markets came down because they were too high.

They were to high because of government regulation.....namely the Federal Reserve regulating interest rates creating bubbles that would ultimately pop.

And our country is not bankrupt, we still have far more collective wealth then Canada has.....is your country bankrupt?
 
ARealConservative said:
And our country is not bankrupt, we still have far more collective wealth then Canada has.....is your country bankrupt?
Click to expand...

Collective wealth? That sounds like the term a communist may use. "Collective" well got news for you, unless you're going to rob everyone in America to contribute to the "collective fund" for paying off our foreign creditors, then what good is "collective" wealth? What are you talking about? We have a huge glut of homes on the market, people enslaved with mortgages higher than the value of the house, overinflated assets in our portfolios, how is that really wealth? Are you talking about gold? are you talking about manufacturing capacity? This crisis is no small deal and to compare us to Canada, who is in far better start position than the USA, I just don't understand it.
 
Liz Peeps said:
Collective wealth? That sounds like the term a communist may use. "Collective" well got news for you, unless you're going to rob everyone in America to contribute to the "collective fund" for paying off our foreign creditors, then what good is "collective" wealth? What are you talking about? We have a huge glut of homes on the market, people enslaved with mortgages higher than the value of the house, overinflated assets in our portfolios, how is that really wealth? Are you talking about gold? are you talking about manufacturing capacity? This crisis is no small deal and to compare us to Canada, who is in far better start position than the USA, I just don't understand it.
Click to expand...

Yes, collective wealth.

Capitalism is based on capital, and Americans still possess a great deal of capital.

You doom and gloomers need to get a clue. To put it in perspective, our national debt amounts to about $28k per person. Canada's much smaller national debt amounts to about $21k per person. (these are pre-Obama numbers of course)

Our arrow is clearly pointed down, but you seem to have no clue how far ahead we were to begin with.
 
ARealConservative said:
Yes, collective wealth.

Capitalism is based on capital, and Americans still possess a great deal of capital.

You doom and gloomers need to get a clue. To put it in perspective, our national debt amounts to about $28k per person. Canada's much smaller national debt amounts to about $21k per person. (these are pre-Obama numbers of course)

Our arrow is clearly pointed down, but you seem to have no clue how far ahead we were to begin with.
Click to expand...

If you think the ability for fat ass Americans to go back to the malls and auto centers is a measure of productivity, than I guess you WOULD just look at debt. Unfortunately, the US and Canadian economy are different, the way they calculate their economic figures are different, and Canada is not at risk of having their currency DUMPED by the rest of the world.

So really, if you look at only one tiny little detail, I guess you have a point, but when you stop to take a look at other factors, I guess then one tiny little point really looks insignificant.
 
Liz Peeps said:
If you think the ability for fat ass Americans to go back to the malls and auto centers is a measure of productivity, than I guess you WOULD just look at debt. Unfortunately, the US and Canadian economy are different, the way they calculate their economic figures are different, and Canada is not at risk of having their currency DUMPED by the rest of the world.

So really, if you look at only one tiny little detail, I guess you have a point, but when you stop to take a look at other factors, I guess then one tiny little point really looks insignificant.
Click to expand...

:rofl

When dealing with any discussion of bankrupty, debt is not a "tiny detail".
 
ARealConservative said:
:rofl

When dealing with any discussion of bankrupty, debt is not a "tiny detail".
Click to expand...

You're basically hand waving away the bigger problems of the United States.

You're saying "well, things are kind of **** right now, but our debt problems aren't really that bad", but you're completely foregoing the thought process that occurs when you bring up debt. It's not just DEBT that's the problem, it's HOW IN THE **** are we supposed to pay off our debt. We can do it through inflation, which would destroy the savings of Americans, the same damn "collective wealth" you're describing, inflation would decrease the value of our debt to the rest of the world (in effect, stiffing our creditors). Or we can pay off debt by doing hard work, and I'm telling you right now that our ability to work has been undermined by government policy over decades. Our manufacturing plants have closed up and been sold off, it is more expensive to hire an American worker than it was decades ago. The current course the Obama administration is going should be giving you some strong signals that private sector jobs will be harder to come by, and there will be growth in government provided jobs. Government gets ability to spend money from bonds, taxes, or inflation. Choose your poison and we will start the discussion from there.

And if our currency gets dropped this introduces other incredibly complex problems that can't be hand waved away like you're doing. Come join me in the economic forum, make your case, and I'll destroy you there----if you would like.
 
Last edited:
Liz Peeps said:
You're basically hand waving away the bigger problems of the United States.
Click to expand...

No, I'm pointing out too a smug Canadian Obot that we are no more bankrupt then they are. Our government is bankrupt, but individuals still possess a great deal of capital and the country is flush with natural resources.

You're saying "well, things are kind of **** right now, but our debt problems aren't really that bad", but you're completely foregoing the thought process that occurs when you bring up debt. It's not just DEBT that's the problem, it's HOW IN THE **** are we supposed to pay off our debt. We can do it through inflation, which would destroy the savings of Americans, the same damn "collective wealth" you're describing, inflation would decrease the value of our debt to the rest of the world (in effect, stiffing our creditors). Or we can pay off debt by doing hard work, and I'm telling you right now that our ability to work has been undermined by government policy over decades. Our manufacturing plants have closed up and been sold off, it is more expensive to hire an American worker than it was decades ago. The current course the Obama administration is going should be giving you some strong signals that private sector jobs will be harder to come by, and there will be growth in government provided jobs. Government gets ability to spend money from bonds, taxes, or inflation. Choose your poison and we will start the discussion from there.
Click to expand...

We have already squirreled away 95% of the purchasing power of the dollar. You can't tell me a thing I don't already know.

Here's my argument: This country's wealth can't be measured fully by the fiat dollars. Capital is more then the funny money printed in the last 100 years. Our monetary system will eventually collapse, but because of the enormous capital built up over the last 200 years, we will rebound so long as we give freedom a chance again.

I certainly give us a better shot of making it then I do Canada.
 
ARealConservative said:
Here's my argument: This country's wealth can't be measured fully by the fiat dollars. Capital is more then the funny money printed in the last 100 years. Our monetary system will eventually collapse, but because of the enormous capital built up over the last 200 years, we will rebound so long as we give freedom a chance again.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how money and currency work. When there is a total lack of confidence in the currency, prices for that currency go up and savings in the banks will be depleted by higher prices.

The only thing LEFT we could turn to would be exporting natural resources, but look at how many natural resources are in African and look at how poor those nations are. You need more than just land and commodities to make a viable economy.

We lost jobs recently in every sector except for education and health care. We are obviously not in much of a hurry to tap that capital you keep referring to (whether money or capital goods).
 
Liz Peeps said:
I don't think you understand how money and currency work.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have a clue about a whole lot of things.

Our government has went bankrupt before. In 1971 we closed the gold window essentially putting up a big middle finger to our creditors and the promises we made them. Even having done so, we remained the global reserve currency. Since then we have only widened the economic/military gap with the rest of the world.

You also don't seem to understand how beneficial it has been for some people to be in charge of the global reserve currency. While our government has went deeply in debt, we have busied ourselves with importing goods while exporting depreciating dollars. The middle and lower class in this country suffer, but trust we when I say that the wealthy have not suffered a bit. The country is wealthier, unfortunately the wealth has consolidated, but you clearly discount the wealth of the country. When the entire world is flush in fiat currency, it is beneficial to be the reserve currency king.


The only thing LEFT we could turn to would be exporting natural resources, but look at how many natural resources are in African and look at how poor those nations are. You need more than just land and commodities to make a viable economy.
Click to expand...

In addition to capital you need free markets and the rule of law to flourish prosper. I don't think Africa does too well in that regard.

We lost jobs recently in every sector except for education and health care. We are obviously not in much of a hurry to tap that capital you keep referring to (whether money or capital goods).
Click to expand...

Yet even with our losses, we remain the largest economy in the world.

How about you go out on a limb and tell us when economic doom is going to hit.
 
Liz Peeps said:
So where's the smart money these days invested, guy?
Click to expand...

the hell if I know, I'm not the power elite that gets to benefit from the system currently in play.
 
Liz Peeps said:
How is that startling at all?

So you think bonds are safe? Do you make bonds an important part of your portfolio?
Click to expand...

The Treasury Department sold the 10-year notes at a yield of 3.365%, well below where it was expected to come, traders said.

well below expected = startling.


....and meth is bad for you
 
TheNextEra said:
I've personally seen families benefited from welfare. Families that took the help and then got back on their feet. I've personally been injured and taken workman's comp and gotten back on my feet. I've seen families personally go on welfare for a couple of months, get work and then go off it back on their feet.

It's not buying into it, it does work. You want to eliminate it all.

If you want welfare, unemployment or whatever reform to keep people being on it for 3 generations, I am all for it. But to say we need to get rid of it entirely I call BS. I've seen the good it can do.
Click to expand...
It's an abused system, and it's stealing. You support it. No one ever said get rid of all support and you know it, but you support it unabated.
 
American said:
It's an abused system, and it's stealing. You support it. No one ever said get rid of all support and you know it, but you support it unabated.
Click to expand...

American, you really need to learn to read before responding.

I even said if you are wanting REFORM, I am all for that. How is that supporting it unabated when I want it to change?

And yes, I know of at least one conservative here that said it would be better to get rid of ALL social programs and stick it into the National Defense budget.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom