I dont know its as bad as you speculate either or it could be more like low grade diesel at this point, i dont know . They" the federal gov" hasnt put money into it to prefect it either as far as i can tell- though it works very well.

Kinda strange to me that the military has to go begging wall street for its funding & its needs &programs.
Meanwhile the gov is spending billions upon billions on unproven so called green saving the planet from melting programs -that just maybe totally meaningless & a total waste of taxpayer moneys.
( but that seems to me(imo) to be more about fleecing the public, by so called public servants & the polticans & those they are in bed with - a lot of money to be had)


If bill gate was

forced to make & market only 100% trouble free products he would be a very poor man today.

 

Honestly, PBLs, I think gridlock is preferable to the kind of spending that is going on. The CBO estimated this week that the debt will be 90% of GDP within 10 years. This is the same CBO that always misses how expensive a program is going to be. There are good parts of government. Those are the parts that provide for national defense and infrastructure (meaning highways and such that are part of the national defense system). But, the government programs that are little more than redistribution of wealth are a huge drag on the economy. I had to laugh when I heard they were going to "slash" 100 million dollars from the budget while starting a healthcare system that is in the trillions. 100 million dollars doesn't even cover the average pork they (republicans and democrats) add to spending bills. 1 trillion dollars is 1 million, million dollars. Right now we are around 3.76 trillion in the hole from what I've read with it increasing exponentially due to unfunded programs where the money isn't there for future obligations. A 100 million dollar cut amount to 1/37,600 th of the debt. In other words they would have to cut 100 million dollars 37,599 more times to break even. Medicare, Medicaid, Soc. Security. They are all in the negative. So, if gridlock happens is it so bad? There are enough laws on the book to cover issues that come up. We just have to enforce them. In the meantime, unless it is to significantly curb or cut spending someone's got to stop.

Now this part is my own conjecture. Probably wrong and probably not going to happen. But, where or how are we going to pay back the countries that we've borrowed the money from? We pay something on the order of $500 million to the Chinese every week in interest only. What happens when we can't meet these obligations anymore? My own thought is that something will need to be sold to pay off our debts. Nothing is more valuable monetarily than natural resources. I hope it never happens.

 

In around 1910 there was an actual congressional proposal to close the US patent office because there really wasn't anything much left to invent. This is true. From the dawn of our nation through the 1960's people were killed, often in grizzly and horrible manners, because of the color of their skin and local law enforcement (in some instances and in numerous areas across our great land) never even investigated. Until very recently (and under the watch of GW Bush) we were only one of 2 countries still legally executing children (the Sudan was the other and they still do). Until fairly recently, predatory grocery stores, like "C-Town" raised their prices significantly the first 5 or so days of evry month. This to "rob" the senior citizens on fixed incomes in their communities of their pension/social security money because that was right after they got their checks. It is still illegal in most places for a medical doctor to prescribe marijuana for things like glaucoma, where it is proven to be an exceptional relief to those suffering from this awful disease (like one of my dearest family members). It is still possible for foreign nationals to retain citizenship or legal green card status even if they are involved in planning or executing terrorist attacks.

I guess we do have enough laws though, so stopping the business of legislating, even the common sense stuff is ineffectual. Who needs laws, especially new ones anyway? We are a better and safer nation just having one-liner campaign mottos and meaningless rhetoric. Maybe, for nostalgia's sake, we should roll back the clock? Start putting people with organic and truama induced mental illness in body lockers for 4 or 5 straight days (you know the ones they pull out on your favorite CSI show to identify a body)? (this was a common practice years ago).

We NEED to get ABOVE the BS and start actually moving forward. Debt is very scary and deficit spending is a dangerous gamble. FDR did it and it worked, but that guarantees nothing. I won't go their, here, because I went on too long already...

 

PBLs you're putting words and ideas in my mouth now. That's very insulting if you think that I'm for slavery, closing the patent office, etc. I don't even now what you are talking about as far as killing children legally unless you're talking about the 40 million thrown away through abortion. (Wouldn't the budget be easier to balance with that many more taxpayers) I'm all for common sense laws that prosecute people that harm other people.

My point is that I'm talking about laws that are breaking the already broken bank. We don't have the money. But, they keep spending it. A couple months ago everyone's share of the debt was something on the order of $40,000 per taxpayer. I'm sorry I don't have that kind of money. I have to live within a budget, but they don't seem to care whether they do or not. Whether intentional or not, they are destroying this country financially. Will we go the way of Greece? I doubt it, only because we have vast natural resources that most countries can only dream of. But, the dollar will suffer.

 

Sorry Moose, didn't want to be rude, just sarcastic. Just mean that the feds can't ignore governance and just campaign, its dangerous. Pendulums swing both ways, whether we like it or not, the slow machine plods on. Or, used to. Was just trying to say some things that would or wouldn't have been done if gridlock were the norm over the last 100+ years. Ending slavery was extremely unpopular with lots and lots of folks. It caused our nations most deadly war (so far). But the machine moved on. Legislators leegislated. It is what we put them there to do.

Didn't mean to put words in your mouth for sure. Oh, and executing children is literal. It refers to our recent cessation of applyng the death penalty to chilren. Only about 4 or 5 years ago. Supreme Court ruled it was a vilation of the 6th Ammendment.

Dems got voted in by a pretty big margin because folks were cheesed off at the previous administration. Perhaps that will change in a few months. That balance is what makes our democracy strong. I think FDR was bigger than the petty gridlock one-liners. Reagan too in my opinion. These guys had IDEAS not slogans. Agree or disagree, they went about putting their VISION into action. The previous 2 administrations have been more concerned with massaging their party supporters and fundraising. We must do REAL campaign finance reform man. It is central to the problem of legislators being beholden to donors. This President remains to be seen still, to be fair. Like his ideas or not. Certainly not a stellar start!

 

I'm for things that make moral and financial sense. Those things shouldn't be blocked. But, the out of control spending, when they have a supposed "pay as you go" law in place has got to stop. They keep talking about more and more government programs where they really don't have the money (our money) to spend on it. The default on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was announced yesterday. Somewhere around $350 billion. That's actually about 10% of the 3.76+ trillion dollars of deficit. Why aren't they talking about getting rid of the "loan to people who can't afford the loans" mentality that started the whole ball rolling on the present financial mess. Instead, Barney Frank is talking about pumping more money into it. When will they get serious?

 

What are you talking about, "he moved so slow on the gulf spill". The was BPs spill, not a natural disaster. How can you compare the two from a government response angle? Makes no sense. I guess you're getting your "news" from a different place than I. Why do you think the American people should be paying for this incident? Why should tax dollars and "Obama" be responsible. Bizarre. By the way, Salazar and variety of other government people (including Obama) were there inspecting the situation within hours of the event. Nice try on a Katrina comparison.

 

Too big to fail....Moose you were in the construction business. You don't think you personally profited from Fannie over the years, either direct or indirectly? Everybody in any housing related business profited from the housing boom, some got very rich that now bitch about it. Builders to the local hardware store that sells brooms all made out big. -Not sayin' it's right, just stating the facts.

 

We just cleaned house......

About the debt to the Chinese. Nah, we just don't pay them back.

 

I don't really think it effected my business one way or the other. I'm mostly out in the suburbs between Boston and Lowell, MA. The way the people I know have gone about it is to get a pre-approved loan and don't go outside of budget. In other words buy what you can afford. I wanted a house when we first got married but it just wasn't happening. It took us 5 years of working hard, scrimping and saving our money, and getting a burnt out heap of ruins at a real estate auction. With my wife's knowledge of banking and my knowledge in building, I built a 1500 sq. ft. house. It's what we could afford to do. And it's fortunate. By God's grace we have kept our head above water even with my wife being out of work for a year and me homeschooling my kids due to the disc problem. If we had spent more than the $100,000 or so it cost us to do what we did I don't know if I'd be in the same boat. We would be living with my mother if we had spent $200,000 or more.

Before the Feds pressured private banks to give out loans to "minorities and low income families" that couldn't have otherwise afforded them, there were good rules in place as to how much of a family's income could be devoted to keeping a mortgage. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had their rules changed to offer more loans to people who otherwise couldn't afford to buy a home. As a result, and with brokerage firms jumping into the fray, we have what we have. An economy that is still on the brink. If taxes get raised to pay for new government programs there will be less money in the private sector and less service and goods sector jobs. We are not heading in the right direction in my mind.