This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

John Boehner Statement On Practically Agreeing To A Debt Ceiling Hike

Tyler Durden's picture





 

Statement by Speaker Boehner on Debt Limit Discussions

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) released the following statement today regarding ongoing debt limit discussions with the White House:

"Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes. I believe the best approach may be to focus on producing a smaller measure, based on the cuts identified in the Biden-led negotiations, that still meets our call for spending reforms and cuts greater than the amount of any debt limit increase."

Zero Hedge translation: in two weeks we get news of no tax hikes, and no deficit reduction, which will be spun by the great diversionary media machine as the great compromise, and, of course, leading to a $2.5 trillion debt ceiling hike. Win, win for everyone. Except America's people of course, but who gives a rat's ass about them: certainly not their "elected" muppets, all of which are for sale to the highest Wall Street bidder.

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:37 | Link to Comment Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

its already been written and the ink is already dry

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:40 | Link to Comment bankonzhongguo
bankonzhongguo's picture

What this really means is that the republicans think Obama and krew will burn through $2.5 trillion between now and the next Special Olymipics - I mean presidential election (if there is one).

So lets call it 1/3 for the Noble Prize winner's Wars - $830MM and the rest for the banksters.

Thats over $150 million a month in burned out taxpayer cash going - where exactly? 

Planet 10?

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:05 | Link to Comment goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

 "elected" muppets, all of which are for sale to the highest Wall Street corporate bidder.

in other corporate news...BMW layoffs exemplify the evisceration of the middle class

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20110703,0,1163343.column?...

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 13:44 | Link to Comment Lem Motlow
Lem Motlow's picture

You mean BMW electing to pay workers their actual economic worth instead of inflated union wages?

Wed, 07/13/2011 - 17:52 | Link to Comment goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

actual economic worth

 

That's a topic for debate.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 09:41 | Link to Comment Non Passaran
Non Passaran's picture

You mean $150MM a month?

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:18 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

and what do we have to thank for this mess?  fiat currency , that's what?  would this happen if we had hard currency?  hell no........the owners of this crap know it too. it is easy to expand money supplies when there is nothing backing it. good for getting countries into debt and subsequently controlling them...

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 12:51 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

Exactly.  When they cannot extract enough labor (taxes) to pay the interest on the exponential debt, they will settle for dividing up the resources of the nation.  

Oh, they will call it "privatizing", not stealing.  There will be an IMF/World bank loan in between, but that is just a formality.  

pods

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:42 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

before privatization, we had capitalism and free trade and we were told that getting rid of regulation was a good thing. so certain parties(haw haw haw) could steal more from the sheep without repercussions......and when certain parties(haw haw haw) get in trouble, they can run to a certain place in the middle east that was created on stolen land in 1948....hmmmm..........

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:42 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

I told ya.

Someone will cave, the debt raised and all is well until the next Election.

 

As speaker, Boehner is third in line for the Presidency. He knows when to back off a little bit and bide his time.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:45 | Link to Comment fockewulf190
fockewulf190's picture

Another $2.5 trillion on top of the gigantic $14,5 trillion dollar pile of shit.  This just makes me want to stack more Phyzz.  Somebody please do the dirty with Blythe in exchange for getting her to repeat another May 1st like PM rape-raid. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 09:27 | Link to Comment FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

The question is how much govt. debt can the FED take on to their balance sheet?  If the answer is unlimited, at what point does the rest of the world (who have dumped 40% of their US bond holdings) deem the US dollar worthless?  If this is the final stages of the Grand Dollar Ponzi, will it end with a sudden bang (year long hyperinflation collapse) or a slow decline over a couple more decades?  I think the unwind will take much longer than most here think.  The debt ceiling will be raised, QE will continue and the can will be kicked towards the cliff once again.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 09:51 | Link to Comment thunderchief
thunderchief's picture

You are correct.   This will give the Chinese and other bond holders breathing room to divest as we slowly let the air out of the USD.   My prediction is some day you will hold up a 100RMB  and a $100 and they will be the same value. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:59 | Link to Comment Janice
Janice's picture

If this is the final stages of the Grand Dollar Ponzi, will it end with a sudden bang (year long hyperinflation collapse) or a slow decline over a couple more decades?  I think the unwind will take much longer than most here think.

What if we have already experienced the "slow decline" since the 90's and we are now building up to the final "pop".  We certainly do live in interesting times.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 12:06 | Link to Comment fockewulf190
fockewulf190's picture

Timmah was just blabbing on Flee The Press that unless the debt level is raised by August 2nd, our debt ratings will be slashed and an economic catastrophe worldwide will occur.  So that means if there is no deal, potentially the SHTF inside of a month.  If the debt level is raised, the debt continues to rise and rise, China and the rest of the world dumps our bonds faster than a used piece of toliet paper, the Bernank prints and prints, and our ratings go down anyway...probably just before the election.  Obama will be all gray by then.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:20 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

boehner sold us out. let's face it. he did it.  he bows the knee and kisses the ring. he deserves to be on the business end of a bayonet, like almost all of them , if not all of them.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 15:30 | Link to Comment jerry_theking_lawler
jerry_theking_lawler's picture

HPD, take it easy bro, someone on here may take your threat as you being serious.....then you know what is next.

 

knock, knock  mr. drifter, (men in black in black SUV's at door), we would like to have a word with you outside, please.

 

last we hear of me HPD....

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 08:55 | Link to Comment thunderchief
thunderchief's picture

When the repulicans shut down the government during the clinton adm.  the economy was creating a few hundered thousand real jobs a month, the tech boom was in full swing and the country was producing a surplus. 

Boner and Co. know if they try this stunt this time the economy will collapse, you will have half the government out of work, the military will collapse soviet style and the dollar with it.  IE they will get their ideology of limited small government handed to them.   They are telling everyone that they really are just kidding about all that stuff. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:22 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

yeh and when these republicrats, start cutting entitlements, the only thing that keeps the cities from buring these days, then we shall see what happens as the sheep begin getting fewer shekels every month......

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:28 | Link to Comment ibjamming
ibjamming's picture

Seems we're getting ready to open ANOTHER credit card account...to pay off the other credit cards minimum payments.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 16:32 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

We actually transferred a 17% onto a introductary 0%

Had 9 months or less to get it paid off. Took alot of PBJ Sandwiches but we got it done in 7. Zero Interest.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:39 | Link to Comment rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

DJIA 36,000 and old at 1:1.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:23 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

dow at 36,000 is fine with me. i know full well what that means. i am heavily diversified and hedged with 25 percent gold and 75 percent silver....

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:40 | Link to Comment Hedgetard55
Hedgetard55's picture

What's up with Boner's orange ties?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:14 | Link to Comment gall batter
gall batter's picture

they're really silver and they reflect his Orangina tan.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:24 | Link to Comment Juan Wild
Juan Wild's picture

Boner's almost as tanned as Obummer

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:49 | Link to Comment jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

no speaker of the house has ever advanced to the presidency by succession.  that should make us feel better, right?

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:42 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

You won't believe what the future may hold. We have after all already experienced many things that I thought would not come to pass over many decades.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 09:01 | Link to Comment thunderchief
thunderchief's picture

His liver is even more tanned from all that hard liquer.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 08:29 | Link to Comment doesmybuttlookf...
doesmybuttlookfatinthis's picture

I finally understand why my butt looks so fat. Boehner's boners in it, and his hands are in my back pocket,

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:21 | Link to Comment tom a taxpayer
tom a taxpayer's picture

It's Angelo Mozilla tan, rubbing off on Boehner.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:24 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

those are his power fag ties....

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:40 | Link to Comment rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

Re-post:

DJIA 36,000 and GOLD RATIO 1:1.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:23 | Link to Comment traderjoe
traderjoe's picture

Until someone replies to your post, you can edit it...

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 10:48 | Link to Comment rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

btw, thanks.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:45 | Link to Comment Newtons Lawyer
Newtons Lawyer's picture

Boehner knows that Obamer doesn't want this same discussion later in his re-election campaign, not that Hope and Change hasn't been in campaign mode since a few days before the election, but with unemployment climbing, debt climbing and Europe imploding, he'd rather not have this as another issue.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:56 | Link to Comment jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

what about charts of the rates of change in the amount and of the period in time between ceiling hikes?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:45 | Link to Comment zorba THE GREEK
zorba THE GREEK's picture

 With signs of weak economy and rising unemployment, both sides now fear either raising taxes

 or massive budget cuts could cause another recession. So debt ceiling will be approved without

 cuts or tax increases. Probably the best move at this time.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:29 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

Probably the best move for a nation of moronic, spoiled, over indulgent, self-entitled credit junkies that are led by the same. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:55 | Link to Comment zeusman
zeusman's picture

You must be refering to Bush and his Cronies who ran the country off a cliff from a balanced budget in 8 years, correct?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:02 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

Bush and his cronies were d-bags but give me a break if you think we had a balanced budget under Billie Clinton.  Talk about voodoo economics.  But the fact that you regurgitated that bullshit really shows you have an agenda for all the world to see. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:46 | Link to Comment zeusman
zeusman's picture

Yes we all have agendas.. Look up the definition

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:26 | Link to Comment Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Youre an idiot.  Both parties are neck deep in this and it goes back at least 40 years.  The dems aint Robin Hood, they just fuel your delusions of such.

You just keep bleating for your stupid little team, painting your face and waving your blue styrofoam finger in the air sports fan. Its about as much as your politically binary brain can handle.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:10 | Link to Comment Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

The NFL wins the Super Bowl AGAIN!

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:09 | Link to Comment goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

+1

In words the shills can understand.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 04:25 | Link to Comment bigwavedave
bigwavedave's picture

"Team America, Fuck Yeah"

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 16:33 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

Pukes.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:09 | Link to Comment knowless
knowless's picture

i lolled.

perfect.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:52 | Link to Comment TorchFire
TorchFire's picture

Cause ANOTHER recession? You mean after the depression we are in is over? These "signs" you describe ...anything new?  The debt ceiling hike however, was a preordained certainty from the inception.  The symblance of any debate on the matter is merely theatrics staged to keep the public duped.  No small wonder that the poor acting skills of the Washington troupe are sufficient to trick the bleating masses....or more likely they meet with a citizenry which longs to believe in the fantasy of self government, rather than recognize the facts they find so terrifying.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:00 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

Does anybody here have a ceiling in there house that rises every year?  "Debt ceiling" is right there with PATRIOT ACT and Homeland Security for bullshit euphemisms. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:44 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

We actually raised ours substantually twice in the last two years. Assisted by a outright sale of a house by cash and clear title to show the credit owner that we are worth the risk. We use the credit as a weapon for our means.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:18 | Link to Comment sgorem
sgorem's picture

EXACTLY++++++!!!!! (thanks Torch, you saved me some typing)

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:10 | Link to Comment goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

The symblance of any debate on the matter is merely theatrics staged to keep the public duped.

Beautifully worded.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:59 | Link to Comment jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

cynic.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:52 | Link to Comment XRAYD
XRAYD's picture

I think Boehner has got the message. Obama was almost certainly going to go "big" with changes to Social Security and Medicare - against the wishes of his own party. Such a deal would have killed the Ryan approach to fixing Medicare. At the same time, most Democrats who are against changes to social security, would have voted against Obama's "compromise" - while the Republican majority in the house would have had to vote FOR any deal Boehner made with Obama. 

It is obvious what would happen to most those in congress who would have voted to cut social security, in the 2012 election!

Hasta la vista, baby!

Barring any resurgence in Republican fortunes, this would mean full Democratic control in Washington after 2012, with even Libermann gone!

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:24 | Link to Comment TheGoodDoctor
TheGoodDoctor's picture

Nicely put my friend. Politics it is!

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:55 | Link to Comment silvertrain
silvertrain's picture

Punt...

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 20:57 | Link to Comment oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

I agree with Tyler's summation. It was obvious, the uncertainity fears were directed at Congress. The Pub pitch had backfired.

This morning a Club for Growth did not want to talk about the congress but completing the oil line from Canada.  I suppose that is now the Koch priority.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:03 | Link to Comment Fazzie
Fazzie's picture

 Yes of course, our political whores courageously unite in the spirit of compromise for the good of America and take the bold step of........well, kicking the can for the umteenth time.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:32 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

If this doesn't energize the portion of this country that has "The Tea Party" mentality then nothing will. 

I did not say "The Tea Party" but the people with that mindset.  Screw Bachmann and all of the other congressional snakes that act as if they are in tune with The Tea Party.  This is really going to anger a lot of people. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:47 | Link to Comment Missiondweller
Missiondweller's picture

So you're against the Tea Party but want to encourage Tea Party minded people?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:51 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

I am not against the Tea Party or Tea Party minded people.  I am against phonies like Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin that have tried to co-opt it for their political gains. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:30 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

Plus one on the Bachmann vibe.

I said it before and here it comes now.

If any TP hanger on brings social issues into this they are unfit in my eyes to hold the office. They are nothing but stupid pandering fools. And she doesn't have executive experience anyways...piss on her.

This is about fiscal sanity, always has been.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:46 | Link to Comment Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Yep, but the media and left struggle with the idea of an essentially leaderless resistance by an angered middle class, so when some of the repubs jumped on an opportunity to make themselves relevant and rode the wave they were dubbed its leaders by those groups.

It does not make them so.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:14 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

Exactly.

But we do allow "others" to chase whatever rabbits they wish, free country ;-)

Mine was a promise kept.

Bachmann is divisive to the real issue and cause. I won't turn from it and can't be made to.

For me its about fiscal responsibility & sanity, always has been, nothing more. The "others" cannot stand that there is "no party", no allegiances, just ghosts, apparitions, taking down members of the "party" of their enemy...they can't figger it out, all their doctrines & best spewed raaaycist bile for nothing...I love it!...two birds with one stone...LOL!!!

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:15 | Link to Comment BeansBulletsBandaids
BeansBulletsBandaids's picture

"TP hanger on"

 

 

 

dingleberries bitchez....

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:43 | Link to Comment JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

Tea Party!

Bought and Paid for..

and Brought too You BUY!

the Koch Brothers!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rpcb9iSJY Koch-Topus  Matt Tiabbi (Rolling Stone)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqhtUTyqVOY&feature=share Gov. Scott Walker Proven Union Buster / Tea Party / Koch Bros Puppet!

 

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/wisconsins-place-vast-right-wing-conspiracy

Fantastic Read, if you would like to better understand who owns the Government Puppets we see on T.V.

 

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2011/04/pdf/koch_brothers.pdf

 


Tea Party!! The Plutocracy: Billionaire Koch Brothers/ Koch Industries BOYCOTT! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o7lvS1wbXU

 

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 13:13 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

;-)

Senator Patty Murray, Chair
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

Dear Senator Murray:

For many months now, your colleagues in the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee leadership have engaged in a series of disparagements and ad hominem attacks about us, apparently as part of a concerted political and fundraising strategy. Just recently, Senator Reid wrote in a DSCC fundraising letter that Republicans are trying to "force through their extreme agenda faster than you can say 'Koch Brothers.'"

So you can imagine my chagrin when I got a letter from you on June 17 asking us to make five-figure contributions to the DSCC.

 

You followed that up with a voicemail indicating that, if we contributed heavily enough, we would garner an invitation to join you and other Democratic leaders at a retreat in Kiawah Island this September.

I’m hoping you can help me understand the intent of your request because it’s hard not to conclude that DSCC politics have become so cynical that you actually expect people whom you routinely denounce to give DSCC money.

It is troubling that private citizens taking part in the discourse have become the targets of White House and DSCC fundraising missives, and we would certainly encourage you to rethink that approach. Ultimately, I expect voters will see through that and will weigh the issues on the merits alone. But in the meantime, if you could provide me some insight on what exactly you are asking of us and why, I would be most grateful.

Sincerely,
Philip Ellender

President, Government & Public Affairs
Koch Companies Public Sector, LLC

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:19 | Link to Comment BeansBulletsBandaids
BeansBulletsBandaids's picture

double postage

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:53 | Link to Comment Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

yup and fuck sarah palin and her pro abstinance slutty pregnant at 17yo daughter .......this is about finances and smaller government and then leave me the hell alone !

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:18 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

It is all about, finance, smaller government and being left alone...all the rest is distraction.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:09 | Link to Comment Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Sadly though, as with so much today in our distorted media distractions are the real issues and the real issues painted as only distractions or outright imagination.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:18 | Link to Comment Goldtoothchimp09
Goldtoothchimp09's picture

AMEN!!

 

unfortunately most people need an authority figure and need to be bottle fed by either their govt., spouse, or daddy

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:04 | Link to Comment Subprime JD
Subprime JD's picture

Kick the mothafucking can bitchezzzzzzz! A good debt ceiling increase to $16.7 trillion should keep this discussion on the sidelines for a good 18 months. How pathetic this all is as we can't dare cut any spending now as the economy is too weak. If things are tough now, wait until the end of 2012 when the debt is 2.3 trillion bigger LOL. Oh well, can kicking continues as expected. Chris Martenson said it best, to paraphrase "the powers that be will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo." The scary part is that the larger the imbalance, the more severe the shock will be. The only thing we can do is work work work and try to accumulate as much gold/silver/frn/food/gun/ as we can.

 

The ponzi continues

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:05 | Link to Comment Lmo Mutton
Lmo Mutton's picture

"Win, win for everyone."

 

Does this "everyone" include the peasants?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:15 | Link to Comment Fazzie
Fazzie's picture

 Yes, the govt subsidised peasants will continue to get paid to fog a mirror.

 The "win" will of course exclude the middle class, but by and large they deserve just what they get for electing the very parasites that use them as a host.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:37 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

The Middle Class is no innocent victim in all of this, either.  Go through your list of the people you know and organize them all by what class you think they are in.  Go talk to the ones that you list as "middle class".  Listen to their sense of entitlement and look upon their actions of the past 10 years.  How many leveraged up their lifestyle, mainly through HELOCs, to live beyond their means.

Most of the people that I know are still responsible, for the most part.  Too bad their political ideas are appalling.  Their sense of what has gone wrong is laughable.  They wouldn't know the Federal Reserve from Federal Express.  They care more about People magazine than they ever would ZeroHedge. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:47 | Link to Comment zeusman
zeusman's picture

Are you telling me that god-like free market wasnt smart enough not to extend loans to all these deadbeat liers? And dont give me the Faux news myth that they were forced to. That is pure bullshit. Had the Federal reserve, SEC and others done their jobs we wouldnt have had the laxed lending standards that directly led to the real estate debacle. Mr. Greenspan didnt help either by keeping interest rates far too low far too long leading to misallocation of capital. Damn them all...

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:22 | Link to Comment maximin thrax
maximin thrax's picture

Well, which is it? Is it the Free Market that failed or is it the regulators, who are by nature meant to contain and curtail the Free Market, that failed? Was it the Free Market or was it the central control of interest rates and money supply by the Fed that failed us?

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 03:18 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

Well, since "the free market" isn't even a model but just a set of desired outcomes (at least the way most people use that term).... asking if "the free market (tm)" has failed, is a little bit stupid....

More fitting questions would be:

1) Have current models resulted in a free market?

2) If not, why?

 

As for 2), my bet would be on:

The models weren't ever designed to result in a free market, but instead a market that is controllable by gov- and corp- monopolies and regulators (usually via intervention, and by enabling and disabling limits at the whim), while allowing free market principles when they are in line with those interests...

... as opposed to the populace, govs and regulators enforcing a "playfield" (especially limits and segmentation. A free market really does NOT need complicated rules - mostly just limits, boundaries and prevention of extortion & fraud), and leaving the rest up to market forces and chaos. So, not a "guided market", but instead just enforcing boundaries of a playfield, and leaving the game up to the players.

So, it's not the "what/who", but the "how" which "failed"... in more than one way.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 08:39 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

A free market can have zero intervention, by definition. Therefore, no regulation is necessary. Regulation is law and law is the use of contracts for a determined result- a result determined by those with the power and influence to get what they want. 

This is why regulation never works. 

As long as people guarantee private property rights, there is zero need for regulation. There is a need for due diligence and some people will be defrauded, but not as many as we have under regulation and at zero cost to us.

Regulation has not failed, it has been a rousing success. It continues to benefit the ones that write it.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 10:50 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

Okay, i see.... so, by your definition of "free market", it is mainly defined by total anarchy (and i here mean anarchy in the "bad" popular definition)..... where parasites and monopolies can form just as they can now, and where massive fraud and manipulation can go on, just like now.

....so, basically a "free market", where not necessarily the majority is "free", and that is not neccessarily "fair" to most.

Okay, by that definition: free markets my ass! I've got that shit already RIGHT NOW.... i don't need the same bullshit just with different stickers on oligarchs and monopolies. Fuck "freedom" and gimme liberty instead!

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:11 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

I mean anarcho-capitalism. The only "bad, popular" definition is exactly that- the result of popular, ignorance and lack of intellectual review. The market is more than capable of policing itself from "parasites" and as for monopolies- exactly what is wrong with a monopoly that does not have the police power of the state behind it? Economic argument please- no appeals to emotion.

Monopolies without coercion allow consumers choice and opportunities to explore alternative solutions. Your definition of monopoy is elementary.

As for massive fraud and manipulation, free markets allow for transparency. Fraud and manipulation would be crowded out. Rather than legislated and protected as it is under government. More government has not reduced fraud and manipulation- it has increased it.

If you think you have free markets now, you are a bigger ignoramus than I thought. The concepts and principles of Anarchy have been well established for over 150 years. The fact we have never evolved to using them have more to say about fraud, manipulation and debt slavery, than anything else.

As for shouting, it does nothing to promote your lack of an argument.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 17:04 | Link to Comment flattrader
flattrader's picture

I would like to de-regulate your pharmaceutical manufacturer, your food producer, your auto-maker...just you...for the products and services you buy...sit back and watch how long it takes one for more of them to severly injur or kill you.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 18:08 | Link to Comment Central Bankster
Central Bankster's picture

This is an appeal to emotion with no substance.  I gladly would eat "unregulated" foods and would (gladly) pay a premium to "trusted" producers.  Prove that regulation protects us and is necessary.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 18:36 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

Regulation achieves nothing specific unless it is specified how it works (and how the flow of decision works - i.e. doesn't need to be purely topdown).

Same for governance and many other "categories".

Reason? Simple: What you are discussing, are words, not their meaning. Terms refer to something... and if that something isn't specified (or overly vague and generic), the terms are hollow and meaningless. Unfortunatelly, people love to play stupid word deathmatches, because throwing around with words, rather than describing what is meant, is so much easier and more comfortable.

To drive the point home: Currently, we have shitty regulation in some aspects, shitty deregulation some aspects, shitty governance in some aspects, and shitty anarchy in some aspects..... actually, pretty much shitty everything. Oh, i dunno.... could it be, that the problem isn't so much with the roles and aspects of a society.... but rather how it is all done?

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 19:16 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Regulation is always well defined. They go to great lengths to define every last term and delineate each action. This is why the people who lobby for each aspect are able to create opportunities and restrictions on any possible penalty.

What you are discussing is bullshit. Your words are hollow, meaningless and meant to obscure understanding. You are confusing the "results" of regulation with the actual working reality. Results that are measured with your own value system. Worse, if the problem isn't with the roles and aspects of society, how can the problem then be with how society performs its' roles and aspects? What, everyone is just doing it wrong? 

By the way, words have real definitions. Just because YOU haven't the ability to use them properly, doesn't mean everyone else is similarly handicapped.

Sun, 07/17/2011 - 20:25 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

You've been argueing about "regulation" in a generic way, without specifying how that regulation works. Therefore, if i were to take your argument strictly (and by the amount of sophism, you seriously deserve this), you have been argueing, that all practically possible regulation is inefficient and bad, and that all deregulation is efficient and good?

Do i need to come up with an alternative to prove, that your argument is bullshit?

Do i need to come up with an example how current regulation results in bullshit, even though if it weren't regulated, it would result in sanity?

Do i need to come up with an example of how current lack of regulation enables bullshit, even though if efficiently regulated, it would result in sanity?

Do i need to come up with an example, where regulation working in a *different* way, would turn insanity into sanity?

No? Thank you, point made. Now STFU ideologue.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 18:17 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Probably the same amount of time it would take now, except they would actually be held responsible for my loss of private property and not protected by a corrupt judicial system that allows them continuous appeals and the diminishment of awards over time.

Big Pharma kills people all the time as their deadly drugs are approved by industry plants, opps, I mean appointments. Food producers? The same ones making frankenfoods and never forced to reveal raw data for peer review? Auto-makers? Like Government motors?

You might want to open a book. There is real information in them. Try it, really... 

Mon, 07/11/2011 - 15:44 | Link to Comment flattrader
flattrader's picture

Yes books do have a lot of info in them.  You may want to read a few yourself regarding what life was like in the 1880s and into the early 20th century when the so-called "free-markets" led to trusts and some of the worst abuses in finance and production this county has seen.

Large corporations regularly killed their own employees, customers and consumers on a regular basis.  Dream on if you think any of them were even remotely accountable for the loss of life and private property.

I believe you are probably young and don't know much about history.  Open one of those books you're talking about.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:17 | Link to Comment Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Thank you.

The "Middle Class" are greedy, narcissistic bastards. They deserve what they get.

Class unity, class pride.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:22 | Link to Comment knowless
knowless's picture

i would list ignorant and childish up there as well. (50y/o spoiled brats)

It's depressing to meet homeless dudes who are more eloquent than the professors I had in college.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 06:01 | Link to Comment lilimarlene1
lilimarlene1's picture

"They wouldn't know the Federal Reserve from Federal Express.  They care more about People magazine than they ever would ZeroHedge."

Ugh, so true. Changing a little, though.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:06 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Zero Hedge translation: in two weeks we get news of no tax hikes, and no deficit reduction, which will be spun.....

Tyler, I inserted Speaker Boner......er, sorry.......Boehner's statement into "Google Translate", then clicked "detect language" and came up with this. I think the aliens have landed and taken over our leaders.

It's the ONLY explanation for the present insanity.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:18 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Actually, it was the Sumerians, but they left their lieutenants and thus the transition to formal governmental structures were created...

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:41 | Link to Comment Arius
Arius's picture

ohhhh...you made me cry ...look at my teary eyes...hmmm boner .....

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:55 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Found another example of alien lifeforms taking over our lives. This one crosses the brain-blood political-monetary barrier and has infected everyone.

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:48 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

What? A bit of Freemasonry buried in old Star of Davids and other Stars of Saturn reaching back centuries across various interpertations ranging from Satan, through mark of the beast and beyond halloween into a Nation that has a lodge in every town?

I think the Masons know damn well what they are doing and we are along for the ride.

You can even discover for yourself that the Rothschilds are into the blood red as drawn across the 6 pointed star inside some lodges apparently.

I am not a Mason.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:25 | Link to Comment knowless
knowless's picture

more than a couple mason lodges have been abandoned and repurposed around where i live, I don't think they are as powerful as some make them out to be.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:12 | Link to Comment New Survivalist
New Survivalist's picture

Best. Crop circle. Ever.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 13:12 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

If I scan that circle-thingy with my iPhone does it take me to the mothership?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:08 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Is anybody really surprised? The real benefit is we aren't paying the debt either, nor will anyone be asked to. I imagine at some point someone will actually sell the brooklyn bridge and the rest of our infrastructure. Of course, possession is 90% of the law...I can see Jaime Demon now, yelling at everyone to get off his bridge...then a thump and some red lights...

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:21 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

At this point, it isn't primarily about "paying the debt".... it is about what created it in the first place... a non-balanced budget.... which in turn has further causes, some of them very deep and structural.... nothing that is simply a matter of swinging an axe.

Now, please remind me - when have politicians shown the last time, that they are skilled at doing things DIFFERENT, rather than simply doing "more" or "less" (spending and cuts) of the same old stuff?

I.e. take the unemployment issue - and the involved expenses (which actually are just buying power on credit, to compensate the lack of buying power). They're talking about throwing money at the problem, or cutting entitlements.... NOWHERE is there any talk about addressing the fact, that the US economy is based on importing stuff on credit, and pointless trading & banking games - ergo, there barely is any selfsustainable domestic economy. Do they ever say any word about changing that?

Getting sanity back into the US budget isn't a matter of simply cutting or increasing stuff - it's a matter of rethinking and redesigning stuff - ergo, nothing politicians can fix.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 07:49 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

You seem to have taken my response seriously. You also think you know all there is to know about how an economy functions- how quaint.

You cannot get sanity back into the budget because it is not the purpose of government to do so. The purpose of all governments is to enrich a small minority. The means is the "Law". 

Whether you have a democracy of the aristocracy (Athens), Emperor, Church, Feudalism,Constitutional Monarchy, Mercantilism, Consitutional Republic, Socialism, Fascisim, Democracy or debt slavery- it is all the same.

The law and police power of the state are the means by which you are enslaved. All the rest are fun, games, work and death. 

Until people remove the burden of government and embrace liberty with responsibility, we will continue to give the greatest part of our wealth to dynastic families of parasites. There are no issues- there is only ONE issue. Everything else will take care of itself.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 10:55 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

Spare me the individualist-anarchist propaganda..... it is totally irrelevant to my previous post.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 11:22 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Spare me your trite and tired opinions. You aren't even capable of understanding that the US has the largest domestic economy in the world. We manufacture just as much as China, we produce more domestic services per capita and retain more wealth and capital than anyone else, outside the combined resources of the EU. 

China GDP is 1/2 the US. If our entire economy was dependent on imports, we would have nothing to pay for them with. While we maintain a negative balance, you ignore all the products we produce domestically and export as well as the products consumed in country.

If you don't understand economics, you might want to confine your arguments to an area you do understand.

PS if politicians can't fix the economy, then why would you need a government? 

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:36 | Link to Comment JoBob
JoBob's picture

Go easy on Rynak. He can use big words like shit and fuck and must be really smart.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 18:51 | Link to Comment Rynak
Rynak's picture

Those are some nice very broad claims about quantities..... unfortunatelly (or fortunatelly for you), you're not not mentioning anything about qualities..... i.e., what this "production", GDP, "wealth" etc consists of.... because it's ugly and quite detached from what US citizens need the most.

Oh, and by the way.... that i ignore that the US does produce and cosume locally, is a braindead and baseless exaggeration. It is so sophistic and dishonest, that i cannot even find the motivation to debunk it, because you are not worth that effort. Fuck, i guess if i would say that greece overly depends on imports, and lacks local production and consumption.... you fucking sophist would go and argue that i totally ignore that greece DOES produce and consume some stuff locally.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:10 | Link to Comment Fazzie
Fazzie's picture

 2 billion??? lol. Thats just a rounding error relative to the deficit. Thats like when Dr Evil extorted the whole world for "one MILLLLLLION" dollars.

 Well I guess we dont have to put the Washington memorial on ebay just yet. We arent the Pigs just yet.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:39 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

If the PIIGS had our military they wouldn't be too worried just yet either.  That is what backs the dollar and The Fed.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:45 | Link to Comment Arius
Arius's picture

russians had that one too ... not that it saved them...it just crumbled w/ the rest of the empire ... so did romans etc...

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:48 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

I disagree with your position.  The Russian military was not anywhere close to what we have.  First off, they had to contend with another superpower, the U.S.  Secondly, everybody forgets that the U.S. has a HUGE advantage over every other nation.  Nearly our entire military can be used for offensive purposes.  Whereas a country like the Soviet Union would never be able to send much of its military far from home, due to the need to protect against foreign enemies and internal dissent, the U.S. is free to go where it pleases.  We have gone to Korea, Vietnam and the Middle East as the biggest post WWII adventures.  The Soviets went to a country that shared a border and it did them in. 

No other country's military has the geographic advantage we do.  Even the Chinese would not get too adventurous with the bulk of their military for fear of internal opposition.  Openly totalitarian governments fear their populations much more than our covertly repressive government. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:00 | Link to Comment Arius
Arius's picture

i dont disagree w/ what you stated .... however, my point is that this is a war of derivatives therefore is no army to fight and defeat... if we lose the war on swaps and derivatives then all is lost no matter how strong the army is it will just crumble w/ the rest .... hopefully it doesnt happen ... all we can do is pray ...

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:04 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

"all we can do is pray"

 

Nothing goes better with a prayer than some whiskey.  Drink 'em if you got 'em.  God invented whiskey.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:08 | Link to Comment Arius
Arius's picture

yep...its time...

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 00:51 | Link to Comment HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

And good tobacco.

Referring to Russia, they have some very tough people capable of operating out of very ... difficult situations. Thier air bases are essentially rusting junkyards our own Airforce wont even consider to operate out of.

I fear and respect Putin, the Russian Bear never sleeps. only hibernates when it suits him.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 12:28 | Link to Comment BeansBulletsBandaids
BeansBulletsBandaids's picture

+1000

 

don't forget about the Bear.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 03:19 | Link to Comment MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

I tend to agree. Most people have this idea that the Bible condemns the use of alcohol, but if one bothers to read the relevant parts, one finds that the Bible actually condones the use of alcohol (to be sure, the Bible does advocate moderation, which is, thankfully, a term that is amenable to interpretation, shall we say?). Really, need one need to know any more than the fact that Jesus himself was a skilled vinter?

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:23 | Link to Comment oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

Wow.  I'm glad your're not a general.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 06:56 | Link to Comment Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

The US has certain advantages over other large armed forces, but "the U.S. is free to go where it pleases" is utter nonsense.

The battle of Kuwait took over a year of prepositioning.  The invasion of Iraq took almost a year, and had the benefit of the prepositioning that had been in place since the battle of Kuwait.  Both involved a huge dosage of blue-pill swallowing from the blue helmets at the UN.  The invasion of Normandy, took even more preparation.

The US is ENTIRELY dependent upon FOREIGN COOPERATION for prepositioning of significant quantities of men and material.  Without Kuwait, where would the US have invaded Iraq from?  The BCTs of the 101st which spent MONTHS prepping materials to be shipped in-theater had to be redirected from Turkey to Kuwait. 

The alternative of 11 carrier groups and the entire MSC simultaneously steaming through the Straight of Hormuz or the Straight of Gibraltar would have been like shooting fish in a barrel for strategically positioned coastal forces or those with submarine fleets.

The entire simultaneous transport capacity of the USN surface fleet provides for transport of only a percentage of the 2.2M men and materials (over 300,000 vehicles) which make up the US Military, without huge intact and functioning port infrastructure at the destination, even a supposedly RORO delivery takes weeks, leaving extremely transport vessels extremely exposed.  Utilizing the aviation fleet capacity of 700 airlift vehicles will suffice for attacking the Toyota equipped Taliban goat herders in Afghanistan when there is already a strong and well armed domestic opposition, but it wouldn't stand a chance in hell of succeeding in Iraq or Iran. 

The current paradigm for the US waging war includes the significant use of unarmed and unescorted commercial transport vessels, both naval and airborne, and a lengthy in-theater build up timeline.  This requires Allies

The only alternative involves nuclear devices, and the US doesn't have a monoploy on that strategy.

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 08:51 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Nice analysis and of course, the opposite holds true- which is, it would make an invasion of America a real nightmare. 

Meaning, all this militaristic imperialism is directed at the control of resources and trade lanes. All the crap about foreign "enemies" is propaganda to scare you into the socialization of military costs. All our sons and daughters die for absolutely nothing. WE are the real terrorists in the global system, the murderers of women, children and the aged. Destroyers of homes and cities. We even kill our own (911). 

Have we lost the ability to live, depending on our ability to produce goods and services , in a way that causes us to be enriched to the degree we are impregnable? It seems we have replaced our true genius with that of over-consuming, lazy, spoiled, overweight humans of questionable skills and intelligence. 

Which makes us very good at one thing-slavery.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 13:18 | Link to Comment Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

I don't think even Zhirinovsky or his Chinese doppleganger would advocate invading the US, but their education systems aren't quite as broken as America's so they might have a difficult time selling that one locally.

One of the biggest problems is that since the US has such an entrenched MIC and large global footprint, that substantial, rational, reduction and refocus gets shifted into an all-or-nothing debate. 

The US does actually have formidable adversaries in the world that it needs to defend against, and their preferred method of engagement is to turn Americans against each other, and profit in the interim through beneficial financial treaty positioning, which makes the education failure that much more deplorable.  TBTF and the MIC turn the State further against its own citizens for their own financial benefit.  TBTF banks keep producing ever more complex and expensive iterations of the same "innovation", the MIC does exactly the same.  I'll take a Mil over a Sikorsky or a Kamaz over over a HEMTT any day, at least I can repair them without a MIC contract and a TBTF bank guarantee.           

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 15:19 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

I would suggest our biggest adversary is the only one that has attempted to invade us- Britain. While they could not conquer us militarily, they have been quite successful financially. As long as they stay in ther shadows, we will continue to enrich and protect them as our leaders all seem to be anglophiles.

Britain is the home of the first central bank (China's experiment in the 12th century with fiat currency preceding it) and the most successful, ultimately positioning banks in almost every country in the world. They have an influence well beyond their resources and with us as their puppet, a real capability- financially and militarily. 

When we add in the Zionists (please people, do not indict the whole of Israel, I'm not) and their connections to British finance through the Rothschilds, we have a very durable, competent and dangerous group of slavemasters. 

However, it all turns on money and law. The creation of sound money and a return to common law/private property would make the world a much safer place. It would make modern militaries unaffordable and relics. Our biggest real threat is our ignorance and the complicity of our leaders with those that have enslaved us.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 10:04 | Link to Comment thunderchief
thunderchief's picture

So true, so who became the great world dominator.  I guess the true ideology and state controlled society is becoming the USA.  Our military industrial complex is becoming so massive it has become a separate country outside the context of what goes on in the USA.  The woldwide military base network becomes an asset over time, where you can haul anything anywhere on C-5's and C-17's without ever talking to a government or customs agent.  That becomes a power and a world of its own.  It makes the old Soviets look like boyscouts.  That is what Eisenhower warned Americans about.  Although he probably never imagined it would be 100 times as ominous. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 10:15 | Link to Comment thunderchief
thunderchief's picture

We have left Agent Orange in Vietnam, where you still cannot grow anything today, and depleted uranium in Iraq.   There are no monuments to architecture or culture left behind after a US Occupation.  Just Trash, waste, illegitmate children and whole lot of people that really don't want us coming back. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:14 | Link to Comment gwar5
gwar5's picture

I agree with no increase in tax rates. Tax rates and tax revenues are two different things -- goal is to raise revenues. A Tax rate raise now will only decrease revenues. 

"We need new taxpayers, not new taxes. I'd like to know which of Obama's new taxes is going to create new jobs." -- Sen. Marco Rubio. 

All the deficit spending and money printing has already confiscated 10% of everything denominated in USD, not just from someone's yearly income. Now they demand more?  If congress hadn't increased structural spending so much in the last 3 years they wouldn't have such a revenue problem now. If they're not smart enough to do the simple math then I'm pretty sure they're not smart enough to plan the lives of 300 million people. Defund the beast, no new taxes.

Rick Santelli is right, stop the spending!

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:34 | Link to Comment oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

Stimulus does not decrease revenue.  Particularly, when it is not paid back.

The real problem is time to diffuse the derivatives. This has been pushed off the radar mainly by politics.

Secondly, we are entering a resource headwind.

Thirdly, we have become uneducated, ideological.

 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:49 | Link to Comment Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Not sure who aruged that stimulus decreases revenue, but it certainly does increase what has to go out.  Cant borrow it and pray it goes away, it has to be repaid and a big chunk of that debt is fairly short term.

Uneducated and ideological indeed.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:44 | Link to Comment grey7beard
grey7beard's picture

>>

"We need new taxpayers, not new taxes. I'd like to know which of Obama's new taxes is going to create new jobs." -- Sen. Marco Rubio. 

 

Rubio was one of the biggest pieces of shit elected in the last fiasco.  As much of a disaster as Obama is, and he's a monumental disater, Rubio has no business questioning him.  Check out his own personal accomplishments if you want to see the story of a loser.

 

 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:37 | Link to Comment oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

Obama has not done somethings I preferred in a timely manner. I disliked some appointments from the derivative camp.  Also, he has been way too lenient on the pubs, imho.

However, the Pubs began hanging themselves, so he looks better by default.

All polls show that the public knows Bush was the culprit.  But polls also show disappointment in Obama's liberalism.  Since the Pubs have gone off the Tea Pary cliff, he did not, so far, grab the middle to the extent he lost liberal trust.

Polls on actual issues show very good for Dems.  I cannot fathom why he put SS on the table.  It is easy to fix and has nothing to do with the deficits.

 

 

 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 04:00 | Link to Comment MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

I made an observation about, well, never mind.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 06:40 | Link to Comment SlipStitchPass
SlipStitchPass's picture

 "Obama has not done somethings I preferred in a timley manner" ...WTF does that even mean? He has done jack shit more than continue with the Bush's master plan. Tell me one thing you think Obama is doing to reverse the sins of GWB.

Put a bag over Obamas head and he is GWB. This is what I tell all of the 40 to 70 year old dems that I know and they just don't get it. Bill Dudley is from a camp but I wouldn't call it the derivative camp. It is a bit more sinister than that.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 23:17 | Link to Comment New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

gwar5: of course you are correct, but in Our Dear President's view, not so much, e.g.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8

and dang if I can't find O with the MoneyHunney saying the same thing.  Oh well, the Internet is scrubbable.

I'm just a small little piglet, but I can't figure out why the spending explosion of the past two+ years can't be shut off.  After all, there are all kinds of desires to go back to the way things were.

- Ned

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:18 | Link to Comment grunk
grunk's picture

Cut Medicare and Social Security.

Grandma moves into the basement with college grad son. College grad son changes grandma's Depends and takes her to the endocrinologist and the Ice Capades in exchange for board.

Win-win-win.

 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:41 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

When college grad realizes that Grandma's generation has thoroughly sold out his generation he will tell her, "change your own fucking Depends". 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:08 | Link to Comment grunk
grunk's picture

We allowed Big Corporate to scatter families all over the place.

Look at the Chinese getting suckered off the land into industrial hell-holes incentivized by higher pay. What are they, 50-60 years behind us?

Taking care of the previous generation had been the norm for time immemorial. We look upon a return to the norm as a declination in our standard of living.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:12 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

It was a lot easier when grandma and grandpa weren't swallowing handfuls of pills every day to make sure they lived to be 92. 

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 08:36 | Link to Comment Dugald
Dugald's picture

"It was a lot easier when grandma and grandpa weren't swallowing handfuls of pills every day to make sure they lived to be 92". 

And you won't? bollocks; you will!!!

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 04:10 | Link to Comment MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

About a year or two ago, I read a thoughtful article about how many of the programs we set up for the retired have not provided the benefits to society (or to the retired, themselves, for that matter) that we had envisioned.

There was a time when multi-generational households were the norm. (Anyone else here have a 10-year-old daughter who buys The Waltons DVD's to try to impart an understanding of the 'olden days' to her?)

Anyway, the author made a persuasive, arguably compelling, case that we have thereby destroyed family, and something beautiful and human, by shipping Grandma off to Florida or Arizona for 20 or 30 years.

I consider ZeroHedge to be ground zero for (true) capitalism. Ironically, it is here that I have learned that there are things that are more important than money.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 09:34 | Link to Comment UgglyBetty
UgglyBetty's picture

Right. The Powerful are interested in family destruction as a fundamental part of "society deconstruction". Family is the only social group where you still are accepted by what you are and not by what you own. So it's necessary to destroy family values (both material and moral) in order to have completely alienated beings, easily enslaved and with other added benefits (consumist, selfish, maybe drug addict, etc...)

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 13:26 | Link to Comment Prometheus418
Prometheus418's picture

Oddly enough, I do have a ten-year-old daughter, but I don't buy the Waltons- I do, however, make her and the younger kids watch old Disney movies like Old Yeller, and make a point of making them watch Looney Tunes cartoons.

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 14:21 | Link to Comment MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Another that my daughter has loved for years is the Little House on the Prairie series. She watches them over and over and over. It is difficult to teach children about time and give them a long perspective. Like all kids, she talks about the 'olden times' and thinks that the events depicted in LHOTP occurred almost before the Dawn of Man.

She cannot quite wrap her head around the fact that it really wasn't all that long ago; for example, that our house was actually built a couple of decades before those events (we live in an old house) and, even more difficult to ponder is that her father (me) and Laura Ingalls-Wilder actually were contemporaries, literally; viz., that I was born several years before Laura Ingalls-Wilder died. And I am not that old. (LIW actually died in 1957.)

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:25 | Link to Comment firefighter302
firefighter302's picture

Temporarily suspend voting rights for those on entitlements. (Other than SS.)

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:00 | Link to Comment zeusman
zeusman's picture

Of course you would include every good republican on Wall street, good red blooded subsidy infused corn farmers in the mid west etc., correct Mr. Firefighter302??

 

 

 

 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:05 | Link to Comment WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

Partisan alert.  Partisan alert.  Partisan alert. 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 22:50 | Link to Comment zeusman
zeusman's picture

Thanks for the alert, LOL.. Forgot the favorite meme of the Right.. To have a left of far right thought is un American. I apologize

Sun, 07/10/2011 - 01:19 | Link to Comment grey7beard
grey7beard's picture

Please include the military and all of their benefits in that list.

 

 

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:25 | Link to Comment Subprime JD
Subprime JD's picture

On a 336-87 vote Friday, the Republican-controlled House overwhelmingly backed a $649 billion defense spending bill that boosts the Defense Department budget by $17 billion.

http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110708/ap_on_go_co/us_defense_spending

Austerity my ass. A 2.6% increase for the pentagon's budget. Dept of Homeland Security should be getting approx $47 billion. Throw in the State dept, vet affairs, CIA, NSA, and all the other "black box" shit and the cost of empire is close to $900 billion. Fuck these motherfuckers.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:41 | Link to Comment CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

17 billion is 2.6% of that 600+ number.  It's even less of the 900 number you prefer.  Inflation is 4%.  That's a cut.

Not a Washington style cut of a reduction from planned increase.  A *real* (as in inflation adjusted) cut.

Sat, 07/09/2011 - 21:51 | Link to Comment Subprime JD
Subprime JD's picture

Good point there crash. Here are the President's budget numbers LOL.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/t...

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