This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Battle of the Budget Bulge: Living Within Our Means?

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Omer Rosen

Battle of the Budget Bulge: Living Within Our Means?

Over the past few weeks I have followed, with something oscillating between frustrated interest and frustrated apathy, what now passes for political theater. Or, I should say, budget-minded theater, for never has a topic of debate so fitted its mode.

What bothers me most is not that the show contains thousands of actors and critics performing on thousands of stages, making coherent debate impossible, relegating revues of Simpson's Bowels to off-off-Broadway matinees, and leaving each potentially useful turn -- first a soliloquy by Ryan and then one by Obama -- quickly clouded with the dust kicked up by its champion's clumsy steps;

Nor that the scripts are staid and timid, relying on platitudes such as "this is difficult," "we have to face facts," and "we have to live within our means;"

Nor that the actors are disingenuous, dancing around truth or refusing to dance with it at all (and, just to keep this overdone metaphor consistent, I'll drop this aside: characters can lie (i.e. ideas can be wrong); actors shouldn't).

One need only listen to Brian Lehrer's April 6th interview of Marsha Blackburn on his public radio (read: Death Star) show to get the idea. The host repeatedly queries the Congresswoman about the Ryan plan's effect on class inequality and repeatedly receives long-winded much ados about nothing. Note to politicians regarding a position: If you don't know, you shouldn't be talking; if you know and don't want to say, you shouldn't be taking (the position).

Nor are what bothered me most those items straddling the past two categories; duck-billed platitudes that aren't actually mammalian at all, such as "closing loopholes." Who can argue with closing loopholes? And why argue at all with a misused phrase?

Namely, a tax loophole is not equivalent to a tax deduction. A tax loophole is a method used to game the tax code in a way the law did not intend. As such, eliminating a tax deduction used as the law intended isn't closing a loophole -- it's just changing the tax code. Not that there's anything wrong with changing the tax code, but it should be referred to as that and not as a marsupial.

Nor is it the fascinating ability of politicians to discuss tax cuts in a mathematical vacuum, as if tax rates interact with nothing else on stage. For example, while the wisdom of a tax cut/hike in the midst of a period of growth/recession is discussed, the differences between a tax change's effects on a period of growth and its effects on a recession are ignored.

Also left out is that cutting taxes from 35% to 25% is nothing like cutting taxes from 75% to 65%. I am surprised, with the never-ending bounty that tax cuts (especially on the wealthy) are said to provide, that we have not yet pushed them down to zero. Or better yet, decided that the wealthy, rather than pay any taxes, should be given "business starting incentives." You know, like the handouts we give the oil and gas industries (with the bonus of the zero tax rate we give G.E.).

I have heard serious suggestions that people will not start small businesses if there is a tax hike. Really? They'll just fold up tent and sulk? Move their families abroad to the hundreds of better business environments with lower tax rates that apparently exist and suit their specific business plans? I understand suggestions that a tax hike would reduce money in the private sector available to start/expand a business, but to suggest that people will say it isn't worth it to start a small business at all because of a tax hike, while perhaps true at the margins, is rabble-rousing. I know many people starting and expanding small businesses and a tax hike on the wealthy is the last thing they fear -- in fact, they aspire to succeed enough for a hike to affect them.

Nor is it the pettiness of it all, squabbling to keep the government open over an amount that could be overshadowed by a minute increase in the government's borrowing rates. An increase the debate itself, if it leads to trepidation regarding Congress's ability to ever balance the budget or its willingness to raise debt ceilings as needed, could cause.

What bothers me most... wait for it... is that the debate is about entirely something else than it claims to be. Return to the revolutionary, insightful phrase we were recently taught: "live within our means." What are our means, really? Are they numbers in congressional bills? Numbers our online bank accounts display? Pieces of paper? These are but (poor) representations of our true means: the resources the planet affords us and that we waste -- err consume -- and are encouraged to waste by the government in order to grow our economy like some chart-shaped chia pet.

And so we are told to live within our monetary means, yet, rather than being told to also live within our environmental means, we are encouraged to live outside of them -- as if there is an outside to this planet, as if an economy would even be possible without the environment. How can an entire debate be held about our means without any sort of acknowledgment of, let alone a reckoning with, what our true means are? The only references to resources come in attempts to defund the EPA or in oil mantras, (un)naturally, such as: "we have to reduce our dependence on foreign (read: middle eastern) sources of oil."

I am not saying that debate about our nation's budget is a waste of time, just that we cannot have it without at least acknowledging what balancing our true budget entails. To do otherwise only works to distance us from reality -- to obscure our environmental responsibilities with yet another layer of human exceptionalism; the debate becomes, to quote the famous line, "just some stuff, said by some politician, full of bluster and angry stuff, signifying squat."

Epilogue

As I have jumped into the deep end of fantasy I might as well drown. Imagine a debate where it is assumed our planet's resources are limited (I know, a stretch), and have to be rationed somehow ("oh wait," you are thinking, "that's crazy talk," you say, as you clutch your iPad with one hand and hide your iPhone with the other).

Say we assume that each person is born with the right to consume the same amount and pollute the same amount and has the same responsibilities to recycle as much as possible -- so that we arrive at some sort of allowed net planetary usage per person. If one has accumulated paper wealth, then one can purchase some planetary usage credits from the less monetarily prosperous.

Sound familiar? It's cap and trade for individuals, expanded to include all resources and pollutants, with the added benefit of income redistribution -- two for one! And, while at this point in our continued planetary despoiling individual cap and trade is not logistically feasible, and the end is too distant for anything remotely resembling it to even seem necessary, the ideas inherent in this plan, that our planet is limited and our environmental means, the means which should need no specifying modifier, must be lived within, should at least inform our budget-balancing battle.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:02 | 1194879 Sock Puppet
Sock Puppet's picture

As another ZHer said the other day, better start fasting 2 or 3 times a week to prepare for the colapse.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 03:50 | 1195490 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

I think Americans are alreday well prepared for a comming crisis.

Most have fat reserves that will last them for 2 years without food.

The only problem they'll  have will be the surplus skin after those 2 years...

 

 

 

Sat, 04/23/2011 - 01:16 | 1198480 Tail Dogging The Wag
Tail Dogging The Wag's picture


"Investors need to diversify, they need to own some real estate, they need to own some farmland, they need to own some equities, some cash, and some precious metals..."   Marc Faber —Investment analyst

Got real estate and farmland outside your home country yet?

http://www.thorssoncapital.weebly.com

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:06 | 1194891 FOC 1183
FOC 1183's picture

Perfect monologue for PS122

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:08 | 1194895 Bent Nail
Bent Nail's picture

Reduce the world population to about 500 million and everything will be okie dokie . . . so long as I am one of the 500 million.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:59 | 1195006 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

Your humor flies over at least one person.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:12 | 1195041 lincolnsteffens
lincolnsteffens's picture

Sounds like that is from Helen Caldicot? No one can say you are wrong. But how many

is too much. I can ga ron tee 1Bil. would be ok too. One thing that is for sure is the concept of "If you don't grow, you die". is part of the problem. Think of humanity like yeast. If you have a nice big bucket of sugar water and only a few yeast multiplying slowly it is no problem. The problem with yeast and people is they have no concept of finite food. They just keep multiplying at their programmed rate until there is nothing left. Then they all die. So far it would appear we are no smarter and have no more control over ourselves than yeast.

Any way you cut it, we have too many using too much and we are shitting all over the place we live

 

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 23:47 | 1195228 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

Sounds like that is from Helen Caldicot?

- - - - - -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - 

The 'Physicians for Social Responsibility' are into population control too?

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 07:40 | 1195614 ibjamming
ibjamming's picture

So then you admit that Stalin, Mao, Hitler...were all RIGHT?  You DO need to kill off a bunch of people every so often.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 03:56 | 1195493 css1971
css1971's picture

300 million Americans. 5% of the world population of ~6billion. 25% of world resources consumed by 300 million Americans.

Methinks 300 million americans are going to see their resource consumption drop dramatically. In fact seems to be already in progress.

Mon, 04/25/2011 - 19:02 | 1205650 tomster0126
tomster0126's picture

It definitely is in progress already...people are scared to spend, and literally don't have money to spend on anything.  we consume so goddamn much it's not even funny, all the hippies that told us to recycle in the 80s are crying now or rolling in their graves. 

 

www.forecastfortomorrow.com

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:09 | 1194901 Debtless
Debtless's picture

We'll be eating one another soon enough bitchez.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:07 | 1195034 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

Stay away from the brain and spinal cord or you'll get the shakes.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 23:21 | 1195189 Andrew G
Andrew G's picture

Fortunately there's lots of vegetarians and vegans on this planet - I'll only eat them. Eating carnivores is not healthy.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:09 | 1194904 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

that's it.  he drowned.  he's gone.  fabulous!

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:13 | 1194905 Goldenballs
Goldenballs's picture

Sod this Austerity,time to go into the only growth industry left - Crime.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:11 | 1195038 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

If they catch you all they do is give you free health care, 3 meals a day, a bed, and conjugal visits.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 00:14 | 1195273 Newsboy
Newsboy's picture

I think "getting conjugal visits" happens from the bigger, stronger prisoners, many of whom have AIDS. I don't think it is experienced as a good thing.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:14 | 1194908 granolageek
granolageek's picture

Dude, you're way too rational for ZH. Around here we believe in infinite growth on a finite planet and that no one making more than 200% of the median income should pay any income taxes at all.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:35 | 1195577 billwilson
billwilson's picture

Yup! It's "morning in America" again. Time to throw off all those artificial socialist limits imposed by governments. Consume, consume, consume, consume and just STFU about limits.

Pretty much sums up why we are screwed.

 

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:25 | 1194942 BORT
BORT's picture

We're fucked, Bitchez

Mon, 04/25/2011 - 19:03 | 1205655 tomster0126
tomster0126's picture

Yupp.  the infrastructure is collapsing from within, and there's no way around it.  We need to invest as much as we possibly can in wind and solar, now.

 

www.forecastfortomorrow.com

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:26 | 1194945 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Well, one does wonder about that "tax on the rich" thingy.  If lower taxes on the "small business" end of the spectrum is all that effective, let's just say it's ZERO.  That should do wonders for "growth" and we'll be out of this mess in no time.   The Bush tax cuts have proven this thesis... right?

(I've not been junked in a while and I'm feeling unloved...)

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:59 | 1195143 Hulk
Hulk's picture

junked you RR. Can you just feel the love now???

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 23:00 | 1195151 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

I have an idea... Let's set up a system whereby the upper 1 % amass huge disproportionate wealth and then they will choose to do what's best for the rest of us because they are so smart and noble. We'll call it "tinkle down"

Please give it a chance though. It might take a few decades to really kick in.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:11 | 1195494 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

Anybody who has a job is deemed rich and will be taxed.

SHAME ON YOU FOR WORKING AND GETTING A SALARY IN RETURN!!

SHAME ON YOU, YOU CAPITALIST PIGS!!

 

 

 

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 09:55 | 1195838 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

RR, Cal Coolidge handled something similar quite a bit better than Hoover, Rosie, 43, and O. - Ned

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 10:46 | 1196044 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

RR you cute furry little varmint, this post is not up to your normal "posting standard", feeling unloved must be affecting your grammar and sentence structure (or maybe your just tired and need to get laid) <"good natured busting of chops">...... but your point is spot on. 

You got 8 junks, got a ways to go to beat Trav's 50 plus junks the other day, now that's a man (at least I think he's male) that's "loved".....

Sat, 04/23/2011 - 17:04 | 1199693 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

I ain't go no posting standards, but you could be right about the burn-out.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:31 | 1194953 honestann
honestann's picture

Yes, huge numbers of creative, inventive, productive people ARE "shrugging"... and not starting a business in the USSA.  Huge numbers, and I am one of them.

The appropriate size of government is ZERO, at least as people understand "government" today.  ZERO budget, ZERO services, ZERO actions.

If somebody wants to offer services that we can voluntarily decide to subscribe-to or not, then fine, they can call themself "government" if they want, as long as they understand that doesn't give "them DBA government" any more power than "others DBA government" (namely ZERO).

Wake up!  Stop supporting FICTIONs.  All organizations are FICTIONs.  FICTIONs.  FICTIONs.  Get that into your heads.  Why do you keep taking these FICTIONAL aka NON-EXISTENT ENTITIES as the most utterly central aspects of reality?  Get real.

Why should any of us support...

predators DBA government
   ... or ...
predators DBA central banks
   ... or ...
predators DBA large financial corporations
   ... or ...
predators DBA large corporations of any kind

?????????????

Answer: This must stop, and damn soon too.  Otherwise the predators-that-be and predator-class will take full advantage of technologies that did not exist before today and make this planet a permanent slave planet.

How much theft is ethical?  ZERO.

How much abuse is ethical?  ZERO.

How much enslavement is ethical?  ZERO.

Wake up.  Get real.  Advocate what is real, and ethical, even if you are one in a million... for now.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:57 | 1195003 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

we have great respect, here, for unethical abuse.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 10:04 | 1195857 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

So, Mr. Rat, what's your take on today's news that McCain is in Libya?  He says that the rebels are "his heroes".   Gag.   This means that we are IN the fight.  The 3rd front on the war on a strategy (terrorism) will soon be in full bloom.   (I kinda like the correlation between war and flowers -- reminds me of my youth in the 1960s.)   The entree into this thing was assured from the first round fired, but now it's clenched with Republican support.   This economic mess can be overshadowed with some newly trumped up froth of war.   What say ye, matey?

Mon, 04/25/2011 - 19:11 | 1205666 tomster0126
tomster0126's picture

Ethics?  I don't think that word is in Bernutty's vocab.  To beat em, you gotta join em. 

 

www.forecastfortomorrow.com

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:22 | 1195665 jplotinus
jplotinus's picture

I would 'unjunk' the post, all the while disagreeing with it. Here's why: We live in an era of 'empire' where the norms of civilization are largely dominated by 'the West' in general and 'the USA' in particular. This period of empire has been characterized by a heavy dependence upon the use of warring against hapless foes, but not against foes who are at or above a certain minimum level of military capability, with few exceptions. The bombing of Serbia might be at the outer limit of nations that are subject to arbitrary military attack by 'the West.' Iran appears to be just ahead of Serbia and, therefore, immune to attack.  Ditto North Korea.

Empires are often replaced by periods of lower levels of organization, as in the 'Dark Ages' that might not have been 'dark' by any measure other than the lack of empire. In dark age periods, it may well be that the level of warring is less destructive than it is in ages of empire.

The question is this: Does humanity advance more in periods of empire; or, does humanity advance more in 'dark ages'?

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:53 | 1195705 Zedge Hero
Zedge Hero's picture

Predators of Religion- Don't forget them sleazy bastards.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:37 | 1194960 Misean
Misean's picture

Nice sermon, oh great priest of gaia.

Such a deep thinker. Any deeper and he be suffocating in his own horseshit. Or compost.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 03:49 | 1195488 css1971
css1971's picture

And you claim to be Misean?

You must recognise the requirement for credit to grow exponentially to pay interest on the previous generation of debt. It's where the religion of growth comes from. The debtors need more money to pay the debts on their marginal enterprises. It's a subsidy of failure.

Replace the word "environment" in the article with "all the stuff around you". Is it infinite? No. Only the (fiat) money and debt are infinite.

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 05:50 | 1195545 Seer
Seer's picture

Another reality denier, someone else who doesn't understand something as SIMPLE as exponential functions!

css1971 is spot-on.  But you won't be responding because you're trolling here...

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:45 | 1194982 nodoctor
nodoctor's picture


Manifest destiny bitch.

Our dependence on foreign oil is one of the few coherent long term strategies that we have - buy everybody else's first.

Don't fret so much about the rest of it, though. Gaia will kill us off when Gaia is good and ready, and not a moment sooner. She has myriad ways. So does Helios. You're just scared the rapture will happen first and you won't get to experience that supreme schadenfreude of seeing starving first-worlders gnash their teeth and curse their sprawling ways.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:15 | 1195561 Seer
Seer's picture

You're confusing WARNINGS with CHEERINGS.

Why is it that people think that those who forsee something are necessarily proponents?  Or is this just another (masked) denial mechanism?

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 07:22 | 1195600 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

I agree with nodoctor. Don't pay attention to the noise; pay attention to the actions. Since at least 1972, the policy of TPTB has been to use as little of the United State's energy [oil, NG] resources as possible and buy the rest from everyone else. Nothing has been done to reduce consumption to any meaningful degree, in fact, they have been busy taking other power sources out of commission whenever they could, including hydro, wind farms run by the Tennessee Valley Authority since the 1930's, no new nukes, no new nuke tech put into production. TPTB seem to want to run everyone else out of oil and gas, while reducing alternatives within the US and setting up fake programs for alternative energy that never go anywhere.

That is the reality. They talk a different game, but those are the actions.  Actions speak louder than words.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:52 | 1194993 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

I agree the effects of progressive taxes on business formation and productivity are at the margin, but that might be a lot.

Unfortunately the loss of it is mostly of bastiat's unseen.

I am right at that margin of my work desire in a high demand industry. I could work extra hours and reduce waiting times for my widgets. Waiting sometimes results in harm in my industry. How much harm could be reduced if i were incented to produce more widgets?

The biggest drag on productivity that no one talks about is zero hedge which alone shaved a full percentage point from last quarter's productivity numbers.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:10 | 1195036 bonddude
bonddude's picture

Milk spat on that one. Really fu#kin funny. Nice.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 09:27 | 1195774 hardcleareye
hardcleareye's picture

TCT, you are NO troll......

I had to look up Bastiat, which led me to "The Candle Stick Makers Petition", oh what a good read....

http://bastiat.org/en/petition.html

I'm still laughing...

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:51 | 1194995 Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

flag as junk (101)

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 21:59 | 1195004 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

This guy watches too much teevee and doesn't write well.

I think there's a good thought in that heap, but it could've been expressed in about two sentences.

Poor writing isn't a good substitute for poetry.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:16 | 1195048 Calculated_Risk
Calculated_Risk's picture

'if we don't live within our means, we'll be forced to live below them!' Ron Paul

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:19 | 1195566 Seer
Seer's picture

And I reckon that most will interpret this to mean that govt is going to be doing the forcing, which is true in a sense, but the real "forcer" is Mother Nature.  We either choose how we're going to go forward, or Mother Nature will choose for us.  And we'll continue to blame some entity as we look away from the mirror...

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:23 | 1195060 gall batter
Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:36 | 1195579 Seer
Seer's picture

Matt's always a fun read.  The first paragraph is fun name-calling, the rest is hypocrisy-shredding.

I don't know what's worse, folks like Ryan, or the folks who support him: I tend to get more worked up by the party hacks, as they're the ones who are blindly ignorant, and WANTING to be that way (like being lied to).

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:33 | 1195089 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

Please show me a libertarian that has more than a transient interest in a person they don't agree with, let alone some nameless, faceless person of future that may or may not agree with them.

Build a big wall around your "property" and burn your trash. What? your neighbor downwind doesn't like it? LMFAO! have him pray to God to fix it.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 09:55 | 1195843 narnia
narnia's picture

The "inconvenient" truth you are learning if you are paying attention is that the libertarian position is not just an ideological one, it's a practical one.  

Most of us just want a good quality of life. We want to comfortably take care of our families' needs, a career / business that challenges us mentally, a safe community, a healthy environment, happy people around us, a quality education for our children that fosters their development & doesn't feed them the American wars are great or some other moral positions, and otherwise to just be left alone.  

We are never going to realize these ideals by means of the nanny state or legislation.  It's not just because everyone has different values, it's because it doesn't work.  The government is terrible in just about everything it does.  It's not just the stuff we don't want them doing (fighting wars, corporate welfare, telling us what to do), it's horrible at the stuff- even if we disagree with them ideologically on approach- we want them to be good at (clean water, clean air, healthy food, defense, protections of liberty & sound currency).  We finance this enormous corrupt enterprise by taxation (direct, indirect in what we purchase & inflation), which is the largest hurdle for any of us to achieve happiness.

I'm not for throwing the ship away & not having practical safety nets, but I'm convinced we have too many governments & the ones we have are too big, doing too much & not focusing on the important stuff.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:13 | 1196172 drink or die
drink or die's picture

Meanwhile, we are bombing 3 random countries.  They don't like it? LMFAO! Have him pray to Allah to fix it.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:44 | 1195122 essence
essence's picture

Look ... unpopular as it might be, the fact is that there are simply too many people on this planet.

Worse, our numbers grow by about 3 packed football stadiums every 24 hours.
Yep, about 150,000 more souls each and every day.

Until the world addresses that issue one might as well be spitting into the wind.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 00:14 | 1195134 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 03:43 | 1195486 css1971
css1971's picture

LOL.

 

5% of world population consume 25% of the world resources. Remove that 5% and we go a looong way to reducing the problem.

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:10 | 1196153 drink or die
drink or die's picture

Better do your part to "address" this issue then by throwing yourself into traffic.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:47 | 1195123 essence
essence's picture

Look ... unpopular as it might be, the fact is that there are simply too many people on this planet.

Worse, our numbers grow by about 3 packed football stadiums every 24 hours.
Yep, about 150,000 more souls each and every day.

Until the world addresses that issue one might as well be spitting into the wind.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:56 | 1195126 essence
essence's picture

duplicate post --sorry

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:59 | 1195129 essence
essence's picture

 

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 22:58 | 1195131 essence
essence's picture

 duplicate post ---

hey, from my end it appeared as if ZeroHedge was non-responsive

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:45 | 1195583 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

The problem was not Zerohedge being non-responsive, it was that you want the "WORLD" to do something about too many people.

We have had population solutions before, I for one will fight against them trying it again, "WORLD" or not. Let's work at solutions that don't end up slaughtering millions of people please.

Thu, 04/21/2011 - 23:33 | 1195205 nah
nah's picture

politics is like an artform... someone draws a bunch of lines and people complain about it

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 00:03 | 1195260 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

Uh oh?

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2011/04/22/0200000000AEN20110422001...

Central bank adviser says yuan appreciation necessary

The gradual appreciation of the yuan against the U.S. dollar is necessary to boost the international use of the Chinese currency, an advisor to the Chinese central bank said Friday.

 

Rumors are a 10% REEVALUATION this week end.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 00:15 | 1195288 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

No! Spending Cuts Needed! We Need Corp's To Pay Taxes! http://goo.gl/PuoLH / $39M Lobby PAY NO TAXES! http://goo.gl/c2s7q

http://goo.gl/zacwI 12 Corporations who Spent $1 Billion to Bribe the Lobby Whores into a 0% Tax Bracket thru Loopholes!

CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE: Hedge Fund Manager John Paulson Earned $5 Billion In 2010, Paid Only 15% Tax http://goo.gl/soFL5

Republicans Block! a Push by Democrats To End The Tax Break for Sending U.S. Jobs Offshore! http://goo.gl/6qhnK

$14 Trillion Dollar Deficit http://goo.gl/FnxBZ And! Then! Another! $15 Trillion Dollars in Loans to Rich Fuckers and Gaddafi! http://goo.gl/EXzal  /  http://goo.gl/d0DLP

Sure Dumb Fuck! Austerity... for the poor! will fix all of our problems!

Spend! $3.5 Trillion to produce $255 Billion in GDP growth (7% efficiency!) http://goo.gl/w81XR

http://goo.gl/oyEh9 27 Statistics that PROVE the U.S. Economy is NOT Improving Unless You are Wall Street

9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes! http://goo.gl/p5p5E

I could go on but if this isnt enough for you to see the light you should do us all a favor and drown your dumb fucking offspring and shoot yourself.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 02:47 | 1195455 i-dog
i-dog's picture

"if this isnt enough for you to see the light you should do us all a favor and drown your dumb fucking offspring and shoot yourself."

I like it ... I think we finally have a plan!

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 00:44 | 1195342 goldsaver
goldsaver's picture

i have two words for this moron. fuck you. or how about bite me. the earth resources are as fungible and adaptable as we need them to be. but he would rather i hold my breath so he can have more to breath. there is only one cause of unbalanced expansion: fiat money and p+i. okn two causes.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:33 | 1195576 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

Why do they junk you? They are truth haters. Reality interferes with the fantasy that we are using everything up.  I think they have guilt problems and think, "it must be bad for me to have more than that guy in the bush in Africa. Somehow if I use less, he will have more". Nothing could be further from the truth. He will continue to have shit, and you will join him in having nothing.

Example: Don't copy that paper, save a tree. Well, if trees were scarce, why is paper cheap? Paper is made from pulp trees that are grown and harvested to make paper, just like corn or any other crop, except a longer cycle, on land that is not productive for other kinds of agriculture. Go to northern Wisconsin, as I did 30 years ago to stay on some land my father bought. The area was failed farms everywhere you went, and you could see why, even a little field had a giant pile of rocks that had to be removed to plow. So instead, the area was growing pulp trees on a three year cycle, the people worked harvesting and transporting the pulp to the paper factory, and worked at the paper factory. When you don't copy that paper, you don't save a old oak tree. You make a family in Wisconsin have to tighten it's belt a little more due to reduced sales. A totally renewable industry that also uses recycled cloth. But please, green watermelons, put them out of business. Idiots.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 09:13 | 1195752 yesmassarothschild
yesmassarothschild's picture

You, sir, are a FUCKING IDIOT. How many trees might one grow,or sheets of paper might one copy, before there is not enough fresh water to drink because your dumbass refuses to conserve? Stupid fuck. Conservation does not equal using nothing. This is simple stuff. People such as yourself are the reason we're fucked, see post above where someone refers to yeast populations, and think.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 02:06 | 1195420 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture

 

Individual cap and trade is what WAR is for.

Ultimately, this is what all of the legerdemain and skullduggery and living for the moment boils down too; a protraction to war, to the killing of other human beings because they need what you have and vice-versa.

We dress it up in polite meetings and treaties and business arrangements until it doesn't work anymore and the weapons come out.

Old cycle - new generations.

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 03:59 | 1195497 Tic tock
Tic tock's picture

Cap n' Trade is an interesting development; while it could provide an impetus to better construction methods and Planning by-laws, as a revenue instrument it seems to be a rather dubiously-configured stick.

The more central issue is the entire funding regime by which government maintains itself. In theory, the citizens are supposed to fund the government from their own pocket...that doesn't make sense anymore because why are we paying for something we don't own? Indeed, the world over, governments operate on the principle that 'they defend the liberty of any given individual - and may take extraordinary measures to do so'. I that and other ways, Government like to own, certainly a freedom-of-action, over what is ours. ...so we are actually supposed to work and then pay for, as far as I see it, an undue level of (surprisingly incompetent and mostly unwelcome) supervision, which cannot be afforded. In part, Obabama's singular achievement has been to alleviate 'taxation-without-representation' off the shoulders of the poorest, to my mind.

Italy has a peculiar perspective on this 'intrusion', this is a simplification- the military run the police, it's actually under the aegis of the Army, separate by a few degrees but also with a distinctly different legal spirit and 'burden of evidence'. Which gives the police much more power than in most countries - but who are also held to a much higher standard. ..also, there is a very good reason to keep the police budget in the untouchable Defense budget, where the pig-farming politicians can't get their hands on it. The point is - security of the people, is probably better understood in the Army framework...but also, we are disallowed from finding corruption, dereliction, or incompetence within the political centre, which is itself, not a clearly demarcated management hierarchy and with a very large amount of conflicting goals, some of which are business-orientated, this is clearly not with the best interests of the security of the people.

The major issue, of funding a government, this is really part of a bigger discussion on the what-the-fuck government is supposed to be doing. I mean, the population is not at all happy with what is going on in political centres. The basis for their existence seems to be to facilitate money-managers. And money seems to have just gone 'Bang!'. So how relevant are they in their current form? And they don't seem to be comprised of people who can have this discussion, apart from Ryan and Paul. Without that discussion, taking place in government, there seems little point in considering how their budgets should be fixed.

As for consumption of limited resources' and population growth - these are issues, but which very wll-understood solutions, many of which are being undertaken. Look at wheat strains being developed in Kenya, for instance. A real problem is water-extraction and the whole viability of cities with unsuitable infrastructure, so there are spending outlets for larger quantities of dollars, though not in the volume in which they are produced. 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 04:07 | 1195501 Electroboy
Electroboy's picture

In case we would like to optimize the individual good-life, of course high quality of food, water, air and green space is needed. With an exponential growth of consumption and people quality of life must be reduced. High quality food is replaced by low quality. Human beeings are great at scaling up, but sooner or later the system is at a point where it is too unstable to sustain. Example: do you really want to eat meat from animals which have been given antibiotics or growth hormons? Do you really believe genetic manipulated corn to be resistent against poison is a good idea to consume? Who drinks liquids out of plastic bottles and thinks there is no effect? We are already at the edge.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:19 | 1195567 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

We are humans but hopefully we are not bees.

Mon, 04/25/2011 - 19:04 | 1205657 tomster0126
tomster0126's picture

right--we're at the edge, and we're about to fall off.  we run on oil, and once there's no more, there's no more us or anything that we've ever known.

 

www.forecastfortomorrow.com

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 06:20 | 1195554 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

More dumbo-jumbo about how central planning will actually be a success this time because we will do it right, not like the other times when we killed a few hundred million people and had the elites as feudal lords over the socialist serfs. We have to share our toys because there are a limited number of them. Guess what, it's an infinite universe, or might as well be for what we are in relationship to it. What did the Europeans do when they needed resources hundreds of years ago? Did they stay at home and stop using things because 'there is a finite number of resources and we need to share with everyone'? Of course not, they went out and found more resources and exploited them. Self interest was at heart, but it raised the living standard of the entire world in the long run - not an intended consequence, but a consequence none the less.

All this doom and gloom, everything is killing us so we must have more government. If everything is killing us, why do we live so much longer than a hundred years ago? If all that working out at the gym is good for you, why did people that worked hard physically in the past die so young, and suffer in the end due to a body that was wore out? Moderation is the key to a healthy life.

Wake up people. Stop drinking the kook-aid.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 07:10 | 1195591 cabernet
cabernet's picture

The government spending money to so call "grow the economy" is the excuse advertised by the government to make the population think they are getting something. To create the illusion for the population to believe they are getting something, the government must borrow so the politicians extract their pound of flesh. The real reason for the spending is to pay off campaign donors. Welfare is paid to able bodied people for a politician to get his vote. (Those who truly need help should get it, but this is a fraction of people who do in fact get it. The Pols need more votes.) Corporate welfare is paid get get campaign donations so the politicians gets reelected. The politicians commits acts of aggression and war against other countries to payoff the military industrial complex, to once again get campaign donations. The budget is about power, who holds it and who retains it.

http://www.TheAngryGrapes.Com 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:21 | 1195664 sunnydays
sunnydays's picture

Congress is passing all kinds of bills against the citizens. 

 

Seems they passed a 911 First Responders Bill last year for them to get treatment for their sicknesses from 911.

 

Oh one catch in that bill to help sick 911 first responders...

 

Congress thinks they may be terrorist so all 911 First responders have to have a complete background check to ensure they are not terrorist before they can get medical help.

http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2011/04/congress-are-terrorist...

 

How could Congress even consider passing a bill like that and then do pass it?! 

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:45 | 1195681 smithcreek
smithcreek's picture

Say we assume that each person is born with the right to consume the same amount and pollute the same amount and has the same responsibilities to recycle as much as possible -- so that we arrive at some sort of allowed net planetary usage per person.

The guy that wrote this bunch of drivel is either arrogant enough to think he's the one that should decide exactly what each person's "planetary usage" is, or he's stupid enough to let someone else decide for him.  That worked great with Stalin and Mao.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 08:53 | 1195706 fiftybagger
fiftybagger's picture

Ahhhh Watermelons.  Green on the outside, but bloody red on the inside.  Bottom line, if they had to choose between you dying or a tree dying, which do you think they'd pick?  Little gods are they, deciding who should live or die.  Overpopulation, their latest scheme for mass murder.  Remember the hole in the ozone?  Oh yeah, they had to shelve that one.  Global warming?  Oops.  Please oh please do Mr. Melon help us save the planet from the starving hordes.  You can start with yourself.  I'll provide the bullet.

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 14:40 | 1196914 Dyler Turden II Esq
Dyler Turden II Esq's picture

Ahhhh Stupid Fucking Idiots. Articulate on the outside, dumb as a box of rocks on the inside.

Overpopulation is not a "scheme", you dumb fuck. It is a reality -- or rather a debateable reality (i.e. it is a matter of opinion when population becomes OVERpopulation). There's good scholarly opinion all over the map on this subject.

Yes, we remember the hole in the ozone. And as a result of the work of the environmental activists that you despise, THE PROBLEM WAS SOLVED.

Please oh please mr self-styled libertoon boob, help us save the planet from all those tree-huggers who would pay prudent attention to very real threats and warnings.

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 23:14 | 1198312 fiftybagger
fiftybagger's picture

Your hole in the ozone never existed.  This "hole" was over the poles.  O3 is created by sunlight hitting O2.  The reason why there is little O3 at the poles is because that's where sunlight hits the atmosphere the least.  It was a fraud.  A laughable fraud.  It was not fixed or cured by anyone.  It's the same way it's always been.  It's just that another environmentalist FRAUD that was exposed.  So they had to move to the next plan for MASS GENOCIDE

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 10:30 | 1195958 Arch Duke Ferdinand
Arch Duke Ferdinand's picture

Must read/view

Happy Earth Day 2011 American Experience Documentary "Earth Days" .....

http://goodthoughtsgoodwordsgooddeeds.blogspot.com/2011/04/happy-earth-d...

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 13:52 | 1196685 Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

Turgid Debt

 

Turgid debt

I'm a banker's pet

deflation threat

makes me frigid

 

turgid debt

printer's fret

when the ink runs out

I'll be rigid

 

turgid debt

I'm not done yet

going to bang those sheep

til I'm flaccid

 

turgid debt

turgid debt

the corpse may bloat

watch my debt float

turds always float

turds always float

 

Coma america we love you fucking stupid sheep!

 

Fri, 04/22/2011 - 14:25 | 1196830 defencev
defencev's picture

This is one of the most idiotic articles I have ever seen. Let me explain to the idiot who created it what does it mean to live within your means. It means you cannot spend more than your income. We can easily define what is government income and what is government spending. Then what is all fuss about? Nobody argues that there are periods when one can borrow some funds. However, there always exists a tipping point after which the debt cannot be repaid. That is where the phrase "living within its means" become sacramental.

If you after reaching this point start to expropriate the wealth of others, the wealth starts flying out of the country and what is left is a buncrupt government along with most unproductive citizenry. This, of course, should come as a great surprise for the idiot author...

Mon, 04/25/2011 - 19:01 | 1205647 tomster0126
tomster0126's picture

With regard to the comments about a tax hike not spurring small business development, as an owner of multiple small businesses and someone who's always looking for new opportunities, I jumped for joy when I heard of Alaska's new loan rates for small business owners.  tax hikes to suppress people from starting businesses, this is a fact. 

 

www.forecastfortomorrow.com

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!