Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not politics, but policy...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Not politics, but policy...


    Interesting video on the mega rich and how they're doing it... at our expense.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7i9uXWrgq4

  • #2
    Rich people don't cost me anything.

    Comment


    • #3
      There are a ton of flaws in that video's logic. Nobody is stopping the government from cutting spending. It is the government spending that is causing the debt crisis. The lowered taxes has increase the work force, increased the of productivity of companies.Course the rich get richer off loaning money to government. If I had the funds I would buy the debt too, for a while. Sooner or later the government either stops the spending or the government will go bankrupt -- just like Venezuela. This is not the fault of the rich, it is strictly the fault of those that will not stop spending. Do you blame the bank for attaching the wages of somebody that ran their credit card up so high they can't even make the minimum payment? if you don't spend more than you have, you will not have debt and you will not have to worry about the interest rate. Socilist blame teh rich and demand they fund those that will not get off their back sides to be self supporting.
      It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tmttactical View Post
        There are a ton of flaws in that video's logic. Nobody is stopping the government from cutting spending. It is the government spending that is causing the debt crisis. The lowered taxes has increase the work force, increased the of productivity of companies.Course the rich get richer off loaning money to government. If I had the funds I would buy the debt too, for a while. Sooner or later the government either stops the spending or the government will go bankrupt -- just like Venezuela. This is not the fault of the rich, it is strictly the fault of those that will not stop spending.
        What's happening is that the rich are making the government spend more money so they need more loans. One mistake I used to make is thinking of "the government" as a single entity that makes decisions. But its not, its just a bunch of people. If candidate Bob wants to get elected, he needs campaign donors so he can buy air time and signs and cute little baseball caps with his slogan. And if Bob wants those donors, he has to make certain promises to his donors on what he will and won't do once he's elected.

        Now if Sally is a real budget minded candidate and wants to cut spending, then she loses the donors with the big money who want her to spend money.. she has fewer donors which equals less money, which means fewer media advertisement spots, fewer and smaller signs, and probably no silly baseball caps.

        So who wins?

        Do you blame the bank for attaching the wages of somebody that ran their credit card up so high they can't even make the minimum payment? if you don't spend more than you have, you will not have debt and you will not have to worry about the interest rate. Socilist blame teh rich and demand they fund those that will not get off their back sides to be self supporting.
        The difference is that the guy with the credit card isn't elected to the position of controlling his own credit card, that's automatic. The difference is that the credit card company has no influence over how Joe Public runs his personal finances because Joe Public doesn't need anything. The second most significant difference is that Joe Public is personally responsible for his financial choices, whereas, an elected official is not held personally responsible, they just may (or may not) get elected again.


        They've hijacked the system. They are simultaneously making the government spend more money while lowering their taxes so they (the government) have to spend more money. And if you don't play along, you don't get the campaign donations to get elected.

        This is also why none of it is being fixed or even an attempt at fixing it. No one who gets elected to a higher position in government is ever going to get there without those campaign donations.

        It has absolutely nothing to do with socialism or capitalism in any direct sense. Its simply a flaw in our system of how we choose our officials.

        Here's an example.
        Would you have voted to bail out the big corporations back in the 08 crash? I would estimate that 5 out of 6 people I talk to say: "Hell no, I was upset they gave those rich people our tax dollars". And yet, that's exactly what they did.

        Every president and every congress promises to balance the budget, reduce debt, bla bla bla..
        Well lets see how that's working out:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U...vernmental.png

        A much bigger picture:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F..._1790-2013.png

        If you or I ran our personal finances this way, we'd both be homeless.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think you confuse rich donors wanting better tax breaks or less regulation with wanting the government to spend, spend. The rich don't need to demand these people spend, They are trying to buy votes just like in the old days. Noting new about buying votes, It has been done since the first government was formed.All the rich have to do is wait and the government will spend itself into bigger and bigger debt. Why would a smart rich person waste money to support and force a candidate to spend, when they know the candidate will spend the tax payers money to stay in office (buying votes). These government leaches don't need to be forced to spend, they want to spend, doing good for their constituents ( their votes). And of course for themselves too.
          It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tmttactical View Post
            I think you confuse rich donors wanting better tax breaks or less regulation with wanting the government to spend, spend. The rich don't need to demand these people spend, They are trying to buy votes just like in the old days. Noting new about buying votes, It has been done since the first government was formed.All the rich have to do is wait and the government will spend itself into bigger and bigger debt. Why would a smart rich person waste money to support and force a candidate to spend, when they know the candidate will spend the tax payers money to stay in office (buying votes). These government leaches don't need to be forced to spend, they want to spend, doing good for their constituents ( their votes). And of course for themselves too.
            Spending isn't a problem if you have money to spend right?

            Spending is only a problem when you're spending money you don't have. IE: When you have to take a loan that pays interest.

            I know that taking a loan is bad.. you know that taking a loan is bad... Pretty much everyone knows that taking a loan and having to pay interest on that loan is bad.

            So why do they do it? Its because the super rich are making them do it so they can become richer.

            I don't subscribe to the idea that they are buying votes with promises to spend. I've never seen a candidate go on stage and tell people they're going to spend more and more money we don't have. In fact, just the opposite, most of them tend to claim they want to cut spending, and of course, they want to cut taxes. Obviously, they're making promises they have no intention of keeping.

            And most people I've met who are on food stamps aren't intelligent enough to be bought by a promise of anything, so unless a candidate gets on stage and says in plain English "I'm going to include extra food stamps so you can buy crab legs", these people don't interpret what cutting spending or extra spending means. Its like someone starting to talk about Stellar Nucleosynthesis, their eyes glaze over.

            There are millions of Americans who are smart enough to understand our debt, and millions who are upset we are going further into debt. If it was anything else, our representatives would have made the changes we demand. So why haven't they? I think its because big money is preventing it.

            This isn't sustainable.




            Comment

            Working...
            X