DC Tom Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 And the magic number shall be............ http://finance.yahoo.com/news/problem-obamas-plan-limit-retirement-141531109.html Wait...you mean Obama proposed a plan that'll be ineffective, sounds good on paper but isn't grounded in any sort of reality, is generally retarded, and is nothing more than a sound byte meant to generate political points with the ignorant populace? Why...that almost never happens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 So if the government left more money in the hands of the people how would it disappear? Why is the government spending good but the citizens spending not? You really don't understand, do you? Lol He was only commenting on your impressive ability to be so fearlessly oblivious to anything factual or relevant so much of the time.No, he was throwing out an ignorant insult but not understand what he was insulting, sort of like you. Do you have a point about bonds, debt or deficits? You are the reason the housing market collapsed in 2007.Whatever that means! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Whatever that means! If you understood your own post, you'd understand mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 You really don't understand, do you? Lol No I don't understand. Please explain to my how when money goes to government it grows the economy but when it goes to the people it disappears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 Politicians have an unending lust for our money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 No I don't understand. Please explain to my how when money goes to government it grows the economy but when it goes to the people it disappears. Then explain to us how balancing the federal budget hurts the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 You are the reason the housing market collapsed in 2007. No ****. Even Barney Frank thinks that post is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Politicians have an unending lust for our money. There will always be politicians who have an lust for our money. What worries me is the increasing number of politicians who believe, as the gatormans' and birddogs of the world believe, that it was never 'our' money to begin with. They have lazy minds, are ever-happy to do as little as possible while getting as much 'free' stuff as possible, and then cheering when a politician points at independently successful people and yells "You didn't build that!" Mindless nutsuckers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 So, we are suppose to concentrate on paying back now? Instead of spending on government you want to pay down debt? Counterproductive I'm sorry, are you suggesting we pay off the debt? We can borrow pretty cheaply and do all those things we totally need to do. [/quote Just because you can, doesn't mean we should. The president didn't propose a responsible plan, a responsible plan would at least pay lip service to reaching a balanced budget- at the very least. What kind of partisan looks at a budget that never addresses deficits and debt, and actually defends it? At some point even the most committed partisan says enough is enough. His plan should infuriate everyone, regardless of ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 You really don't understand, do you? Lol The absurdity of your comments is that you feel the best way to grow the economy is to funnel more money to the government. Whether it's via taxes or selling bonds that money will make it's way to the economy. Well if that's the case and you can make a case for that why not cut out the middle man? The government is involved in way more than it needs to be and much of what the government does what not it's original role as laid out in the Constitution. If more money is left to the people it too will find it's way to grow the economy. The only way it won't is if people hoard it under their mattress and I'm her to tell you very very few people in this country are doing that. They are spending it, investing it and putting it in the banks who invest it and buy government bonds with it. You are !@#$ing brain washed. Or would that be brain dead? Probably a little of both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 What kind of partisan looks at a budget that never addresses deficits and debt, and actually defends it? The kind who believes that balancing the budget will hurt the economy. Not surprisingly, this is the same kind of partisan who is unable to explain what that means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 No I don't understand. Please explain to my how when money goes to government it grows the economy but when it goes to the people it disappears. I'm kind of shocked--I shouldn't be--that you don't get this. Did you take macro economics in college? If a person has $100 and buys bonds with it, its like there is $200. The bond the person is holding, and the money the government can use to build something. The "disappearing" part is if you don't do this. The absurdity of your comments is that you feel the best way to grow the economy is to funnel more money to the government. Whether it's via taxes or selling bonds that money will make it's way to the economy. Well if that's the case and you can make a case for that why not cut out the middle man? The government is involved in way more than it needs to be and much of what the government does what not it's original role as laid out in the Constitution. If more money is left to the people it too will find it's way to grow the economy. The only way it won't is if people hoard it under their mattress and I'm her to tell you very very few people in this country are doing that. They are spending it, investing it and putting it in the banks who invest it and buy government bonds with it. You are !@#$ing brain washed. Or would that be brain dead? Probably a little of both. This is such stupid crap. Why not shorten it and say, "Me no like-e government, it bad" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I'm kind of shocked--I shouldn't be--that you don't get this. Did you take macro economics in college? If a person has $100 and buys bonds with it, its like there is $200. The bond the person is holding, and the money the government can use to build something. The "disappearing" part is if you don't do this. So I buy a bond for $100 it magically turns into $200? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 So, we are suppose to concentrate on paying back now? Instead of spending on government you want to pay down debt? Counterproductive I'm sorry, are you suggesting we pay off the debt? We can borrow pretty cheaply and do all those things we totally need to do. [/quote Just because you can, doesn't mean we should. The president didn't propose a responsible plan, a responsible plan would at least pay lip service to reaching a balanced budget- at the very least. What kind of partisan looks at a budget that never addresses deficits and debt, and actually defends it? At some point even the most committed partisan says enough is enough. His plan should infuriate everyone, regardless of ideology. So, we are suppose to concentrate on paying back now? Instead of spending on government you want to pay down debt? Counterproductive I'm sorry, are you suggesting we pay off the debt? We can borrow pretty cheaply and do all those things we totally need to do. [/quote Just because you can, doesn't mean we should. The president didn't propose a responsible plan, a responsible plan would at least pay lip service to reaching a balanced budget- at the very least. What kind of partisan looks at a budget that never addresses deficits and debt, and actually defends it? At some point even the most committed partisan says enough is enough. His plan should infuriate everyone, regardless of ideology. No it shouldn't. The country was basically built on a debt. Alexander Hamilton created the national debt and the progress has been basically straight up from there. Bonds have been a sound way to keep taxes low and get things done going back into the Renissance. You said yourself we need many infrastructure projects built and if you believe that then debt relief needs to be put on back burner and is counter productive. Instead of new bridges you would pay of debt? Not me. If we had the luxury of doing both, sure, count me in, but I don't see it happening now So I buy a bond for $100 it magically turns into $200? Thank you! I knew you didn't understand And you advise people about their investments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I'm kind of shocked--I shouldn't be--that you don't get this. Did you take macro economics in college? If a person has $100 and buys bonds with it, its like there is $200. The bond the person is holding, and the money the government can use to build something. The "disappearing" part is if you don't do this. What? If a person buys a bond from the government for $100 ( ), it's like there's $100. The buyer doesn't have $100, he has a bond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 No, he was throwing out an ignorant insult but not understand what he was insulting, sort of like you. Do you have a point about bonds, debt or deficits? Insult? He was only asking if you ever get embarrassed. All I did was answer him. Now please continue. I'm making popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Thank you! I knew you didn't understand And you advise people about their investments? I do and it's really good you don't otherwise you'd be out of a job real quick. What? If a person buys a bond from the government for $100 ( ), it's like there's $100. The buyer doesn't have $100, he has a bond. I tried to buy some groceries with my $100 bond but for some reason the grocery store wouldn't take it. Then interest rates went up and I tried to sell to some guy but he'd only give me $80 for it. The guy is delusional. Edited February 5, 2015 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I tried to buy some groceries with my $100 bond but for some reason the grocery store wouldn't take it. Then interest rates went up and I tried to sell to some guy but he'd only give me $80 for it. The guy is delusional. I tried to buy a new printer with a 30-year T-Bond. No luck. I told them it's the same thing as money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I'm kind of shocked--I shouldn't be--that you don't get this. Did you take macro economics in college? If a person has $100 and buys bonds with it, its like there is $200. The bond the person is holding, and the money the government can use to build something. The "disappearing" part is if you don't do this. If I buy a $100 piece of furniture, I have a piece of furniture worth $100, and the furniture company has $100 they can use to build something. It's like $200 easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 What? If a person buys a bond from the government for $100 ( ), it's like there's $100. The buyer doesn't have $100, he has a bond. James or Barry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts