Can you trust the gov't?

[WisconsinBillzFan]

Just a complete coincidence I suppose that you picked a black woman. Right, maybe you are just a racist. I would expect better answers out of a troll. You know, low IQ might not be a causative factor in racism, but I am willing to bet that most racists have that issue. At least this one does. Oh and I left you another link so you can look up the word.

 

I picked her because 1)she has been in the news a lot lately for her weight 2)she's one of the fattest women i've ever seen.

[Magox]

No you can't really trust the government, but it sort of aggravates me that this longstanding problem that has been around for 60 year now it just now being recognized by the right. Why is the right wing so far behind the times in everything?

 

One other thing you can't trust, that the right seems to have an infatuation with, is corporations. No you cannot trust them either. However the Republicans are blocking every attempt the get some laws to control them a bit. I suppose in 50 more years the right will come around to realize this problem also.

That's a pretty shallow and incorrect observation.

 

The conservative movement has always been founded on smaller government, not always practiced, but none the less founded, so this isn't anything new, the only thing that is different now than before is the intensity of the movement. Many of these people are disillusioned from the massive spending from the Bush era and enraged with Obama's dramatic acceleration of it, and there is a general sense that is growing that there are some devastating consequences that lie right around the corner. There is also a perfectly legitimate fear out there of our country moving towards a social democracy. Let's be real here, if this health care bill stands it WILL eventually turn into a single payer system.

In the Health Bill, in a stealth like matter they took over the student lenders. It looks as if there will be some new taxes down the pike, and these taxes will have to stay. How are we going to keep paying for S.S, Medicare, HealthCare subsidies, defense spending and our growing government? Taxes taxes taxes.... They have to go up if we continue to grow the size of government. It's really not that difficult to understand, it's just a little bit of common sense and basic math.

 

We are going to be saddled with so many different taxes that soon enough we will become a country that struggles to grow in a healthy manner because of the size of government. I don't just say this just to say this, but the proof is in the puddin. Look at the growth rates of Europe and you'll see those economies have been growing at a moderate to stagnant pace for nearly 2 generations now. Look at Greece. They have so many problems, and why? Because of spending. Now they will have to make massive cuts to their union work force, freeze spending, increase taxes and at the end of the day, they will still end up defaulting. Why? Because the cost to servive their debt is going to be will be at an unsustainable rate and break the backs of their economy. California, look at that place, you want to see pain? Watch the state budgets over the next few years. Not many people talk about it, but the state budgets are all going to suffer over the next few years, and why? Because of spending, because of all their entitlement programs and unfunded pension and health care benefits.

 

To your point regarding Wall Street Reform. You're totally off base, I can assure you, I've been keeping up with it. Corker, Gregg and Shelby who are all on the Senate banking finance committee all have a tremendous willingness to craft a bill. The reality Picnic is that the Democrats are losing the battle in the court of public opinion on most political arguments, so this is a battle that the Democrats want. They feel like they can win this battle, the only thing that is nearly as unpopular as Congress is Wall Street. So the plan is to craft as partisan as a bill as possible, knowing the GOP won't go along with it, so that they can paint them as siding with Wall Street. Of course, the only people they are fooling are the sheeple that subscribe to their bull ****

 

But now, the GOP has recently signed a letter with all 41 senators vowing to fillerbuster the bill as it stands. The main sticking point is the $50 Billion bailout fund that is funded by the banks.

 

The Democrats argue that this is a bill that is funded by the banks, so that the US taxpayer won't be liable. The GOP contends that this bailout fund from the banks still doesn't address the issue of Too Big too Fail, and that the US taxpayer is still on the hook. Well of course it is, $50 B is nothing, AIG used $180 B by itself, Fannie and Freddie are at over $400B. The president isn't even completely on board with this $50 B fund, because basically it's an admission that it still doesn't do much to avert taxpayer bailouts. Of course, Dodd and Reid say that it does address this issue, but common sense dictates otherwise.

 

At the end of the day, there will be a bill.

[George]

Posted in OTW

 

 

 

You really either can't help yourself, or you are a troll. I had you on ignore, but Tom kept quoting you so gave it up as a lost cause. I have been here for a few years, but I have never seen anyone draw such condemnation so quickly. I have never seen this board this united over anything. There could be a meteor streaking towards Earth and there would be more dissent amongst the board members than over you.

 

P.S. George really hates you too, he is a disguised liberal, so probably hates you more than most of us.

 

Now this is just getting old. All the fake conservatives here yapping and yammering that I'm a disguised liberal is bad enough but for you assclowns to imply that I hate someone that I consider to be one of the few bright and articulate conservative minds on this Friggin Liberal Board is just too much.

 

WBF, Keep Fighting the Good Fight, Brother! Spread the light of your sage wisdom over these heathen liberals! Eventually the sheer weight of your common sense approach to race relations will burst thru the barriers of their liberal education and upbringing. They will see the light, Brother! And You WILL Be The MAN Who Leads Them Out of the DARKNESS!

[WisconsinBillzFan]

WBF, Keep Fighting the Good Fight, Brother! Spread the light of your sage wisdom over these heathen liberals! Eventually the sheer weight of your common sense approach to race relations will burst thru the barriers of their liberal education and upbringing. They will see the light, Brother! And You WILL Be The MAN Who Leads Them Out of the DARKNESS!

 

Whatever George, or should I say DC Tom? I'm not stupid.

[DC Tom]

Whatever George, or should I say DC Tom?

 

No, no, no, no, no. I'm Alaska Darin and pBills. /dev/null is George.

 

I'm not stupid.

 

That would be more believable if you weren't so...well...stupid.

[WisconsinBillzFan]

No, no, no, no, no. I'm Alaska Darin and pBills. /dev/null is George.

 

Yeah, like I care who's who.

[George]

Yeah, like I care who's who.

 

Does it matter that I'm the white guy?

[Booster4324]

Does it matter that I'm the white guy?

 

Slipped a bit there, still funny.

[pBills]

Does it matter that I'm the white guy?

 

 

I think that your the Mexican, Black, Irish, Russian guy.

[DC Tom]

Yeah, like I care who's who.

 

Then WHY DID YOU BRING IT UP?????

[ExiledInIllinois]

Well for starters, returning back to the gold standard simply put is impractical.

 

A gold standard would undoubtedly lead to deflation whenever an economy which uses the gold standard grows faster than the supply of gold. It's just basic math. Think about it, monetary policy would be largely determined on the amount of gold we mine. Does that make sense to you?

 

Plus, there are approximately 140,000 tons of gold, which at todays value represents roughly $5 Trillion. The M2 Value in the US alone is close to $9 Trillion. This would lead to some serious imbalances.

 

And contrary to popular conservative belief, there are benefits to increasing the supply of money, if used properly. If we were to go back to the gold standard, this would be eliminated as a possible solution, which would seriously suck. You could make a reasonable argument that by being on the Gold Standard we were not able to successfully avert the Great Depression. It handcuffed our ability to expand credit during a time of strong deflationary forces.

 

It's just not a plausible solution.

 

Speaking of gold:

 

National Geographic: The Real Price of Gold

 

I found this fact really astonishing:

 

"For all of its allure, gold's human and environmental toll has never been so steep. Part of the challenge, as well as the fascination, is that there is so little of it. In all of history, only 161,000 tons of gold have been mined, barely enough to fill two Olympic-size swimming pools. More than half of that has been extracted in the past 50 years. Now the world's richest deposits are fast being depleted, and new discoveries are rare. Gone are the hundred-mile-long gold reefs in South Africa or cherry-size nuggets in California. Most of the gold left to mine exists as traces buried in remote and fragile corners of the globe. It's an invitation to destruction. But there is no shortage of miners, big and small, who are willing to accept."

[John Adams]

Don't feed the troll.