DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> American Debt....REALLY!!!!!!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 35, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/01/2012 10:29:05 PM · #1
Come on now.....Can we really afford this guy.

Today the U.S. Debt = $15.4 trillion
When President Obama took office in 2009 the U.S. Debt = $9.986 trillion
When President Bush took office in 2001 the U.S. Debt = $5.629 trillion
The U.S. owes more money than any other nation in the history of the world
The U.S. debt is up 54% under President Obama in just over three years
By the end of President Obama’s first term the U.S. debt will have increased by a larger amount than under President Bush’s entire two-term presidency
Debt per citizen = $49,300
Debt per taxpayer = $136,000
Over 60% of all spending is on the “Big Four" - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and National Defense

Really....I don't even know what to say. If you want to find the info above here is the site.

check this out
03/01/2012 10:34:03 PM · #2
Yea you are missing where the true problem lies. The FED.
You seem outraged by this but where were you for this thread?

16 Trillion in Secret Bank Bailouts

The president only has a certain amount of say to push one way or the other. The real people in control are working behind the scenes and putting on the pressure. In other words, Democrat or Republican, we're going to see the debt continue to skyrocket unless we make some fundamental changes in the way our system works, and root out corruption.
03/01/2012 10:52:25 PM · #3
Originally posted by escapetooz:

Yea you are missing where the true problem lies. The FED.
You seem outraged by this but where were you for this thread?

16 Trillion in Secret Bank Bailouts

The president only has a certain amount of say to push one way or the other. The real people in control are working behind the scenes and putting on the pressure. In other words, Democrat or Republican, we're going to see the debt continue to skyrocket unless we make some fundamental changes in the way our system works, and root out corruption.


I was against the bailouts...everything from fannie/freddie to banks to auto bailouts. I don't believe in too big to fail.
03/01/2012 11:05:12 PM · #4
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Come on now.....Can we really afford this guy.

Today the U.S. Debt = $15.4 trillion
When President Obama took office in 2009 the U.S. Debt = $9.986 trillion
When President Bush took office in 2001 the U.S. Debt = $5.629 trillion
The U.S. owes more money than any other nation in the history of the world
The U.S. debt is up 54% under President Obama in just over three years
By the end of President Obama’s first term the U.S. debt will have increased by a larger amount than under President Bush’s entire two-term presidency
Debt per citizen = $49,300
Debt per taxpayer = $136,000
Over 60% of all spending is on the “Big Four" - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and National Defense

Really....I don't even know what to say. If you want to find the info above here is the site.

check this out


So I take it you just want a better democrat in office? Surely you don't want a republican...

Originally posted by wiki article:


Economist Mike Kimel notes that the five former Democratic Presidents (Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy, and Harry S. Truman) all reduced public debt as a share of GDP, while the last four Republican Presidents (George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Gerald Ford) all oversaw an increase in the country’s indebtedness.[16] Economic historian J. Bradford DeLong, former Clinton Treasury Department official, observes a contrast not so much between Republicans and Democrats, but between Democrats and "old-style Republicans (Eisenhower and Nixon)" on one hand (decreasing debt), and "new-style Republicans" on the other (increasing debt).[17][18] David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan, as op-ed contributor to the New York Times, blamed the "ideological tax-cutters" of the Reagan administration for the increase of national debt during the 1980s.[19]


//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt

Message edited by author 2012-03-01 23:05:34.
03/01/2012 11:43:54 PM · #5
Back out a massive tax cut for the rich that was promised as temporary, a hugely expensive prescription drug program, deregulation that allowed investment banks to speculate on risky mortgage derivatives that led to economic disaster, and two major wars conducted without raising taxes for the first time in U.S. history and the debt would be a much, MUCH smaller number. You're blaming the person who has to pay the bills when the party's over for spending too much.

While you're against the bailouts, 1.7 million auto industry workers, 6.3 million auto-related private sector employees, 1.8 million banking employees, 2.3 million insurance workers, 1.5 million people in real estate, etc. might not agree. It's more than a little surreal to see a guy in the military complaining about government spending...
03/02/2012 11:58:41 PM · #6
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Yea you are missing where the true problem lies. The FED.
You seem outraged by this but where were you for this thread?

16 Trillion in Secret Bank Bailouts

The president only has a certain amount of say to push one way or the other. The real people in control are working behind the scenes and putting on the pressure. In other words, Democrat or Republican, we're going to see the debt continue to skyrocket unless we make some fundamental changes in the way our system works, and root out corruption.


I was against the bailouts...everything from fannie/freddie to banks to auto bailouts. I don't believe in too big to fail.


Sigh. This is not the official bailout. The official bailouts I believe were somewhere in the billions. These secret bailouts were in the TRILLIONS and NOT the decision of the govt.
03/03/2012 07:26:24 AM · #7
the bailout should have been market adjusting all the houses.

instead of giving the banks the money the feds should have given the money to the people. my mortgage is only slightly under water. but the value of my home is down nearly 65% from when i bought it as with every home in my town.

the feds should have given me say $10 or $20 thousand to use to pay down my principle and EVERYONE els, basically a percentage of their decreased home value, the banks should have eaten a loss of a certain percentage too. this would have brought the mortgage back more the their actual values. it would have erased the astronomical home value growth that occurred over the past decade, and rightly so, since it never should have occurred.

i bought my house for more than it was worth but i also sold my last home for more than it was worth. i can afford my mortgage, but i cant sell my house if i wanted to.

we also need to throw some of the crooks that presided over the collapse to actually serve time.

03/03/2012 10:17:07 AM · #8
Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.
03/03/2012 10:20:53 AM · #9
Originally posted by blindjustice:

Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.


This could be the subject of discussion later this year... well at least the first part anyways.

Ray

Message edited by author 2012-03-03 10:32:55.
03/03/2012 10:32:27 AM · #10
Originally posted by blindjustice:

Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.


What are you trying to say here?

I could go for GM being dead too.
03/03/2012 11:49:54 AM · #11
Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by blindjustice:

Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.


What are you trying to say here?

I could go for GM being dead too.


your not making sense.
03/03/2012 12:08:21 PM · #12
Originally posted by blindjustice:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by blindjustice:

Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.


What are you trying to say here?

I could go for GM being dead too.


your not making sense.

Seems like she's saying GM isn't exactly a good thing. Preserving the jobs is preferable to losing them, but the company itself is no more beneficial to society than Halliburton or Goldman Sachs. When the auto industry was on its knees and Cash for Clunkers was in effect, I thought that might be a good opportunity to get a small, fuel efficient car for a daily runabout. None of the Detroit automakers offered anything appealing in that category. Chrysler didn't even make a car that topped 25mpg city... and they still don't.
03/03/2012 03:55:11 PM · #13
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by blindjustice:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by blindjustice:

Osama is dead, and GM is alive. Under McCain/Palin-don't want to speculate.


What are you trying to say here?

I could go for GM being dead too.


your not making sense.

Seems like she's saying GM isn't exactly a good thing. Preserving the jobs is preferable to losing them, but the company itself is no more beneficial to society than Halliburton or Goldman Sachs. When the auto industry was on its knees and Cash for Clunkers was in effect, I thought that might be a good opportunity to get a small, fuel efficient car for a daily runabout. None of the Detroit automakers offered anything appealing in that category. Chrysler didn't even make a car that topped 25mpg city... and they still don't.


But, but it's American! Where's your patriotic spirit?

*sarcasm off* If only Obama didn't go around trying to be half pregnant with his ideas he would be a great president.
03/03/2012 04:02:47 PM · #14
Originally posted by yanko:


... If only Obama didn't go around trying to be half pregnant with his ideas he would be a great president.


He could always propose a colony on the moon...oh wait, that has already been proposed.

Trust me, there are enough stupid ideas and comments to go around.

Ray
03/03/2012 04:15:56 PM · #15
Originally posted by mike_311:

the bailout should have been market adjusting all the houses.

instead of giving the banks the money the feds should have given the money to the people. my mortgage is only slightly under water. but the value of my home is down nearly 65% from when i bought it as with every home in my town.

the feds should have given me say $10 or $20 thousand to use to pay down my principle and EVERYONE els, basically a percentage of their decreased home value, the banks should have eaten a loss of a certain percentage too. this would have brought the mortgage back more the their actual values. it would have erased the astronomical home value growth that occurred over the past decade, and rightly so, since it never should have occurred.

i bought my house for more than it was worth but i also sold my last home for more than it was worth. i can afford my mortgage, but i cant sell my house if i wanted to.

we also need to throw some of the crooks that presided over the collapse to actually serve time.


i really like this idea!
03/03/2012 09:19:15 PM · #16
Originally posted by o2bskating:

Originally posted by mike_311:

the bailout should have been market adjusting all the houses.

instead of giving the banks the money the feds should have given the money to the people. my mortgage is only slightly under water. but the value of my home is down nearly 65% from when i bought it as with every home in my town.

the feds should have given me say $10 or $20 thousand to use to pay down my principle and EVERYONE els, basically a percentage of their decreased home value, the banks should have eaten a loss of a certain percentage too. this would have brought the mortgage back more the their actual values. it would have erased the astronomical home value growth that occurred over the past decade, and rightly so, since it never should have occurred.

i bought my house for more than it was worth but i also sold my last home for more than it was worth. i can afford my mortgage, but i cant sell my house if i wanted to.

we also need to throw some of the crooks that presided over the collapse to actually serve time.


i really like this idea!


Sure you do, but how does it help the 1%?

They don't care how many people go homeless or starve. Money, money, money.
03/12/2012 10:44:25 PM · #17
Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Yea you are missing where the true problem lies. The FED.
You seem outraged by this but where were you for this thread?

16 Trillion in Secret Bank Bailouts

The president only has a certain amount of say to push one way or the other. The real people in control are working behind the scenes and putting on the pressure. In other words, Democrat or Republican, we're going to see the debt continue to skyrocket unless we make some fundamental changes in the way our system works, and root out corruption.


I was against the bailouts...everything from fannie/freddie to banks to auto bailouts. I don't believe in too big to fail.


Sigh. This is not the official bailout. The official bailouts I believe were somewhere in the billions. These secret bailouts were in the TRILLIONS and NOT the decision of the govt.


Yes, but the $16 trillion doesn't get added to the U.S. debt. The Fed doesn't have the authority to borrow money. It buys and sells the debt that is already out there in the form of U.S. Treasuries. This was a bailout but not exactly the same as the other bailouts. The debt right now I believe is about $15 trillion total, so if another $16 trillion had been added to it, you can see that it would be around $30 trillion.
03/13/2012 01:32:21 PM · #18
The fed buying treasuries is exactly the same as the fed printing money out of thin air (which is the Fed's job). But it's never been done at this level before. It's called "quantitative easing" and essentially they are debasing the value of the dollar.
03/13/2012 03:40:08 PM · #19
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

The fed buying treasuries is exactly the same as the fed printing money out of thin air (which is the Fed's job). But it's never been done at this level before. It's called "quantitative easing" and essentially they are debasing the value of the dollar.


Are you responding to my last post?
03/13/2012 04:10:28 PM · #20
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

The fed buying treasuries is exactly the same as the fed printing money out of thin air (which is the Fed's job). But it's never been done at this level before. It's called "quantitative easing" and essentially they are debasing the value of the dollar.


Are you responding to my last post?


Not directly. I'm not disagreeing with you, just phrasing it in another way how it's "different" than the US buying Treasuries when there are other buyers.
03/13/2012 11:22:57 PM · #21
Hmmm... ok so it doesn't get added to the US debt directly but... that's money the banks can loan out at no cost the them, but a tremendous cost the the borrow paying high interest rates on fabricated money that was pulled out of some FED worker's anus.

Got it. Again I say, and I'm crazy for thinking people shouldn't pay back their student loans? (I've had friends act like I was immoral for thinking this and I don't get it.)

It's all a giant scam. It's the banks giving the public practically counterfeit money that no one worked hard for, and there is no backing for, and then the public pays it back with money they actually worked for and never pay it off with interest rates upwards of 25%. Free, thin air money in a lump sum paid to young students who don't see much other choice, paid back in increments for the rest of their lives. The banks don't WANT the money paid off. They want that steady income, forever. They earn a lot more if you just keep paying, paying, paying interest adding up.

Does that not sound like indentured servitude to anyone?

Message edited by author 2012-03-13 23:25:01.
03/14/2012 01:30:24 AM · #22
Originally posted by escapetooz:

Hmmm... ok so it doesn't get added to the US debt directly but... that's money the banks can loan out at no cost the them, but a tremendous cost the the borrow paying high interest rates on fabricated money that was pulled out of some FED worker's anus.

Got it. Again I say, and I'm crazy for thinking people shouldn't pay back their student loans? (I've had friends act like I was immoral for thinking this and I don't get it.)


Just another example of the authority complex at work. Just call yourself a corporation and then your friends won't call you immoral. Not only that but you'll also get to keep more of your money on the taxes you don't pay which you could then put towards your loans. However, that's being too responsible. Now that you're a corporation you're expected to have more debt than equity so just pocket the money and be proud about it.

Message edited by author 2012-03-14 01:32:14.
03/14/2012 01:53:26 AM · #23
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Hmmm... ok so it doesn't get added to the US debt directly but... that's money the banks can loan out at no cost the them, but a tremendous cost the the borrow paying high interest rates on fabricated money that was pulled out of some FED worker's anus.

Got it. Again I say, and I'm crazy for thinking people shouldn't pay back their student loans? (I've had friends act like I was immoral for thinking this and I don't get it.)


Just another example of the authority complex at work. Just call yourself a corporation and then your friends won't call you immoral. Not only that but you'll also get to keep more of your money on the taxes you don't pay which you could then put towards your loans. However, that's being too responsible. Now that you're a corporation you're expected to have more debt than equity so just pocket the money and be proud about it.


It's even more frustrating because if you mention that you get the "2 wrongs don't make a right" response (cus we're 5 and the world is that simple) or even better "I knew what I was getting into with my student loans. I made the commitment, now I have to pay it back."

Like an 18 year old really has any idea what 50 grand looks and feels like when it starts coming out of their pay years later at 23% interest. It's all hypothetical at that age. And that's exactly what the loan companies count on. Most who take on student loans are still children in mind.

I really lucked out that Florida, at least when I went to school, had great scholarships and grants. I knew not to get into debt, and had the opportunity to educate myself without loans. I consider myself very lucky. Most of my friends were not as lucky. I'd love to see all of their debt disappear. And with this magical money being thrown around, it very well could.
03/14/2012 06:44:41 PM · #24
Originally posted by escapetooz:

Hmmm... ok so it doesn't get added to the US debt directly but... that's money the banks can loan out at no cost the them, but a tremendous cost the the borrow paying high interest rates on fabricated money that was pulled out of some FED worker's anus.

Got it. Again I say, and I'm crazy for thinking people shouldn't pay back their student loans? (I've had friends act like I was immoral for thinking this and I don't get it.)

It's all a giant scam. It's the banks giving the public practically counterfeit money that no one worked hard for, and there is no backing for, and then the public pays it back with money they actually worked for and never pay it off with interest rates upwards of 25%. Free, thin air money in a lump sum paid to young students who don't see much other choice, paid back in increments for the rest of their lives. The banks don't WANT the money paid off. They want that steady income, forever. They earn a lot more if you just keep paying, paying, paying interest adding up.

Does that not sound like indentured servitude to anyone?


I agree with you about the student loans. One of these days I'll have to read up on how the system changed so radically since I was in school, when interest rates on student loans were 3 percent and you had forever to pay it back (and could suspend payments if you were unemployed). In any event, there will be massive defaults if some reforms aren't undertaken. I believe Obama is supporting legislation that would put a cap on the amount that can be collected from student loan debt, the capped amount being dependent on the individual's income, regardless of what's owed and regardless of the interest rate. That might help some.

And, of course, I'm in complete sympathy with Bernie Sanders' criticisms of the bailouts with respect to the fact that the Fed, and the government, moved heaven and earth to save the banks, institutions operating on such a corrupt level that it's still difficult to wrap your mind around just how bad the corruption was, and bailed them out with virtually no strings attached... and what was done for the little guy who was scammed and defrauded and in many cases whose meager wealth was wiped out entirely? The answer is, unfortunately, very little. In my opinion, this has been the biggest failing of the Obama administration... not that any Republican administration would have done better. But still, I expected more from Obama.
03/14/2012 10:29:03 PM · #25
The thing with the student loans is you can't get out of paying them. You can't bankrupt them. If you go in default they attach your bank accounts, your paycheck and take any and all refunds for taxes. There are only 2 ways to get out of paying student loans. Become permanently disabled or die.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 01:46:04 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 01:46:04 PM EDT.