[Treghc]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Go through and see who starts the name calling and I think you'd be surprised to find it's often linked to the pleas to emotion, forefathers, tradition, etc. that define a certain political party.

Wish I had a way to chart the usage of the word "liberal" or any demeaning iteration of it against "republican" or any demeaning iteration of it. From my experience on this forum, I'd wager that for ever 1 demeaning "republican" usage, there are at least 4 demeaning "liberal" sayings. Gonzo is really the only one dumb enough to resort to simple name calling in arguments (on the liberal side). At least the guy gives sources and can hold up in debate for a little bit before he finally succumbs to the name calling. L2K has his spurts, but the guy knows more about economics than anyone else here, as far as I've seen.

[licence2kill]

i get angry when people make **** up, which is sadly quite common on these forums.

[jamest91]

its sadly quite common with American politicians too unfortunately.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Wasn't it you that made up the fact that Muslims were exempt from Obamacare? You are the "people making **** up" that LTK is talking about.

[licence2kill]

Originally Posted by jamest91

its sadly quite common with American politicians too unfortunately.

you're the worst ****ing offender

[AlphaNeo36]

Originally Posted by jamest91

its sadly quite common with American politicians too unfortunately.

street smarts

[jamest91]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Wasn't it you that made up the fact that Muslims were exempt from Obamacare? You are the "people making **** up" that LTK is talking about.

that was definitely not me lol. stop making things up.

[benji25]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Is that adjusted for real dollars or as a percentage of gdp?

Graph made by yours truly as taken from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

[licence2kill]

Originally Posted by jamest91

no, im just saying his post shall lead to the flocking of the left wing guys in here, which will end ultimately with name calling and insults I am sure.

here is an illustration for a debt to gdp ratio with the last couple presidencies showing change. I miss Clinton

damn ronald reagun sucks

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by benji25

Graph made by yours truly as taken from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Would you not debt to grow as technology and markets increase? More efficiency and less risk lead to higher lending.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by benji25

Graph made by yours truly as taken from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

This graph paints a wildly different picture than measuring debt by sheer dollar amount.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

This graph paints a wildly different picture than measuring debt by sheer dollar amount.

Could be because how they figure gdp has changed, you think?

[benji25]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Would you not debt to grow as technology and markets increase? More efficiency and less risk lead to higher lending.

This is debt of the US government. Ideally we would had a system where we operate off of our own internal revenue (taxes) and a very low amount of debt.

So for our debt to be rising as a percent of GDP is not usually a good thing because it means our debt is growing faster than our economy.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by benji25

This is debt of the US government. Ideally we would had a system where we operate off of our own internal revenue (taxes) and a very low amount of debt.

So for our debt to be rising as a percent of GDP is not usually a good thing because it means our debt is growing faster than our economy.

There is no way you can read that graph to say that the debt of the federal government is on a perpetual rise. Why is it ideal to operate primarily on our own internal revenue, especially considering current interest rates?

[benji25]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

There is no way you can read that graph to say that the debt of the federal government is on a perpetual rise. Why should we ideally operate primarily on our own internal revenue, especially considering current interest rates?

I never said you could read it that way. Someone asked if the other graph was as % of GDP so I provided that graph.

We should ideally operate on our own revenue so that we are not relying on other countries. That means we can focus on ourselves and not be dependent on other countries

[Space Pope]

Originally Posted by yesme

Could be because how they figure gdp has changed, you think?

My guess is that it is because you don't know any more about economics than you do about the mechanical properties of structural steel.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by benji25

We should ideally operate on our own revenue so that we are not relying on other countries. That means we can focus on ourselves and not be dependent on other countries

1. The majority of our public debt isn't held by foreign countries.

2. We're plenty dependent on other countries in areas outside the realm of public debt. Is such dependency equally deplorable?

[benji25]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

1. The majority of our public debt isn't held by foreign countries.

2. We're plenty dependent on other countries in areas outside the realm of public debt. Is such dependency equally deplorable?

1. I realize this but there is a sig portion (1/3 I think) that is. Too much? Idk I don't know all of the facts

2. Yes but we are dependent on the in the normal markets/course of business. I think you are meaning for trade/imports etc. in those situations our citizens are purchasing items in the free market or obtaining items that we cannot produce enough of here (oil). In that situation ideally I would not like to rely on other countries if we don't have to but sometimes it just not physically possible.

The other part of the debt is government programs that are not solvent. Hopefully we can fix those (I prefer spending cuts rather than more taxes)

To me the government should take in taxes ( and some debt) from the people and whatever that money is is what we get to spend on programs. If we don't have the money to pay for everyone one to have a cell phone tough cookies work hard enough so you can buy your own.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Space Pope

My guess is that it is because you don't know any more about economics than you do about the mechanical properties of structural steel.

Great, so why don't you econ whiz kids tell us when the recovery is going to start?

Start with us here, then tell us about the recovery in europe and japan.

I'll be waiting whiz kids.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

1. The majority of our public debt isn't held by foreign countries.

2. We're plenty dependent on other countries in areas outside the realm of public debt. Is such dependency equally deplorable?

That's a ballsy statement on number 1 sir.

Most of our debt is held by funds, but who exactly owns the majority of shares in each of those funds?

What banks own the most % of the fed reserve and do those banks have foreign backers?


please provide source's, thanks.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by yesme

That's a ballsy statement on number 1 sir.

Most of our debt is held by funds, but who exactly owns the majority of shares in each of those funds?

What banks own the most % of the fed reserve and do those banks have foreign backers?


please provide source's, thanks.

No, the ballsy statement is for you to make things up then ask ME to prove them for you.

I'm not doing your homework for you. I provided a source, but if you want to call in to question the implications of that source feel free to use PROOF to do so.