Why the US is in so much Debt.

[mvaliz]

First off bush started the wars then that got us in the shitter initially but then obamma kept barrowing and barrowing money that we dont have and that sealed mine, my future children, and grand children's fate. And the debt keeps going up every day. thats it in a nutshell.

...I guess you're just hoping we just let that whole "Bank Bailout" thing slide right past Bush's administration since they designed and proposed it - but just because Obama signed it after Bush left it's somehow HIS debt. As if John McCain wouldn't have signed it at all had he'd been elected... right?

---------- Post added 2013-03-25 at 04:17 AM ----------

In fairness to libertarians, I think a lot of people right now are wrapping themselves in the libertarian flag without really understanding their ideology because they're feeling disaffected.

I made another comment in another thread. The moment the Libertarians gain any ground, the nutters from the Republicans will jump ship, hijack it, and re-start their insane Rhetoric campaign all over again, just like they did when the Tea Party happened - and they jumped on it and destroyed it utterly. \

Libertarians... don't let that happen - I'm warning you. Take a lesson from VERY recent history! Keep the nutters away... FAR AWAY... from your party!

[Wells]

I made another comment in another thread. The moment the Libertarians gain any ground, the nutters from the Republicans will jump ship, hijack it, and re-start their insane Rhetoric campaign all over again, just like they did when the Tea Party happened - and they jumped on it and destroyed it utterly. \

Its because so many social conservatives are carrying so much cognitive dissonance they think they're libertarians.

[semaphore]

It's the necessary price for expensive toys that you play with on other countries.

[Deleted]

War cost alot, and we as the free world know USA helped, alot.

I think I read every soldier stationed inn Iraq costed 150k dollars each, if you did the total cost for the war up like that, for USA only.

BUT! With all that said - USA is big, and as such they have a responsibility. Im glad Obama tries to make sutle hints at the fact that USA shoulden't interfeer inn every war around the world, but also achknowledeging his responsebility inn the big wars.

and what are the big wars ? the ones involving the USA ?

[Wafffles]

I don't feel like being 'fair' to people who see the age of the robber barons as the height of what the country could and should be.

Ironically, you dismissed the notion that the libertarian movement isn't properly understood by stating a fictitious libertarian objective which highlights your lack of understanding of the libertarian movement. So lets see, then, the next logical step is for me to dismiss your notion with some made up statement...

I don't feel like being 'fair' to Obdigore because unicorns poop kittens after eating chocolate ice cream!

[semaphore]

and what are the big wars ? the ones involving the USA ?

Yeah everybody small wars don't cost money. Basic third grade logic. What did they teach you in schools?

Oh wait.

[breadisfunny]

Yeah everybody small wars don't cost money. Basic third grade logic. What did they teach you in schools?

Oh wait.

i dont think he was implying that the only wars that cost money are the ones the u.s. is engaged in. pretty sure he was challenging the op's post which was pretending that the usa is the only power that has to pay for war. which is false.

[semaphore]

i dont think he was implying that the only wars that cost money are the ones the u.s. is engaged in

No, he was implying that the US isn't involved in big wars so they don't cost a lot of money. $4 trillion on bombs and soldiers and Afghanistan bribes? Spare change!

$4 trillion to treat our our poor and elderly and young? What are you, a commie?

pretty sure he was challenging the op's post which was pretending that the usa is the only power that has to pay for war. which is false.

War cost alot, and we as the free world know USA helped, alot.

Talk about pretending.

[breadisfunny]

No, he was implying that the US isn't involved in big wars so they don't cost a lot of money. $4 trillion on bombs and soldiers and Afghanistan bribes? Spare change!

$4 trillion to treat our our poor and elderly and young? What are you, a commie?



Talk about pretending.

i dont really agree with the governments policies either. i think the u.s. needs to stop waging completely unneccesary wars. IM LOOKING AT YOU IRAQ WAR. operation freedom my butt. the only reason we invaded iraq is because bush wanted to give his haliburton friends easy contracts.

[obdigore]

Ironically, you dismissed the notion that the libertarian movement isn't properly understood by stating a fictitious libertarian objective which highlights your lack of understanding of the libertarian movement. So lets see, then, the next logical step is for me to dismiss your notion with some made up statement...

I don't feel like being 'fair' to Obdigore because unicorns poop kittens after eating chocolate ice cream!

Do you know where deregulation and a lack of any kind of government oversight of business, and in essence, a free market lead? Just where I said it does. I know most Libertarians don't know this, but when you look at historical examples and think through what happens, this is what you get.

[THE Bigzoman]

Do you know where deregulation and a lack of any kind of government oversight of business, and in essence, a free market lead? Just where I said it does. I know most Libertarians don't know this, but when you look at historical examples and think through what happens, this is what you get.

I will hear nothing from you. Just give me some of that ice cream poop!

[stellvia]

tl;dr:

Essentially, despite what the GOP would tell you, the vast vast majority of the huge increase in gov't debt since WW2 has been due to spending under GOP leadership, not Democrats. Our debt ratio and total rose sharply under Reagan and Bush Sr. Then Clinton cut down on the debt a decent amount and put us into a small yearly surplus that would have paid off our debt in another 10-15 years or so. Instead, the first thing Bush Jr. did coming into office was give a tax cut and run us back into a yearly deficit. He ran something like $500B a year deficit, and the last year (this is BEFORE bailout spending) he was in office, he ran a 1.1 TRILLION deficit.

Then for stuff like Obamacare: You're already paying for other people's free rides on health care right now. Anyone that has no insurance and goes to the emergency room -- paying for that comes out of increased premiums for everyone who does pay for insurance. Obamacare would actually result in far more people paying their fair share.

The GOP also isn't serious about really cutting any spending. We have the example of the UK and other EU countries trying austerity and they had double dip recessions. While our growth has been anemic -- it has at least been steady and in the positive direction. Our Debt to GDP ratio is still only about 100%. Japan has maintained 200% for many years without doing dramatically bad things.

Yes, we don't want to keep spending 1 trillion deficits in budgets every year. But we screwed the economy SO badly, that unless we want to sit back and let everything take 20 years, we need to do short-term spending to kickstart growth. In fact, citizens DEMAND that the gov't does something to fix things faster. Look at how the Dems were voted out of congress only 1.5 years after the collapse -- because it "wasn't fixed yet" -- that the largest economic collapse since the Great Depression wasn't fixed at the snap of fingers.

And now congress is making everything worse atm tho -- the complete deadlock on getting absolutely anything done due to the GOP refusing to budge even 1% leaves business people shaky on when to invest. They don't know whats going to happen in the next few years. Just look at the Sequester happening atm, etc.

Kinda makes you want to move to Canada for 5 years or something and let all this BS blow over...

[Wafffles]

Do you know where deregulation and a lack of any kind of government oversight of business, and in essence, a free market lead? Just where I said it does. I know most Libertarians don't know this, but when you look at historical examples and think through what happens, this is what you get.

You can't 'jump to the ending' to justify your arguments. Do we live in a utopia? Nope, because every single form of government in the history of mankind has been flawed. That doesn't mean you can skim through history, pick out the most egregious misapplication of a set of principles, and claim it will always end up that way no matter what. Otherwise, you can argue communism will always lead to a Great Purge, libertarians will always lead the country back to the Robber Barons, and we should all just live in separate caves and never interract with other human beings. Of course, if we act under the reasonable assumption that we're gonna have to put up with one of these imperfect governments sooner or later, might as well be one that doesn't pass a law, say, banning large sodas.

[obdigore]

You can't 'jump to the ending' to justify your arguments. Do we live in a utopia? Nope, because every single form of government in the history of mankind has been flawed. That doesn't mean you can skim through history, pick out the most egregious misapplication of a set of principles, and claim it will always end up that way no matter what. Otherwise, you can argue communism will always lead to a Great Purge, libertarians will always lead the country back to the Robber Barons, and we should all just live in separate caves and never interract with other human beings. Of course, if we act under the reasonable assumption that we're gonna have to put up with one of these imperfect governments sooner or later, might as well be one that doesn't pass a law, say, banning large sodas.

Part of the population dying on the street because the society refuses to help them, compared to a law that tries to combat the rising obesity epidemic and rising cost of medical care in the country?

Great comparison.

[breadisfunny]

You can't 'jump to the ending' to justify your arguments. Do we live in a utopia? Nope, because every single form of government in the history of mankind has been flawed. That doesn't mean you can skim through history, pick out the most egregious misapplication of a set of principles, and claim it will always end up that way no matter what. Otherwise, you can argue communism will always lead to a Great Purge, libertarians will always lead the country back to the Robber Barons, and we should all just live in separate caves and never interract with other human beings. Of course, if we act under the reasonable assumption that we're gonna have to put up with one of these imperfect governments sooner or later, might as well be one that doesn't pass a law, say, banning large sodas.

so you would rather we switch governments so you can have the freedom to.....sip a large soda? you can already do that in 99% of the cities in america i dont see what your getting at with that last example?

[THE Bigzoman]

Part of the population dying on the street because the society refuses to help them, compared to a law that tries to combat the rising obesity epidemic and rising cost of medical care in the country?

Great comparison.

Banning large sodas won't address obesity.

More accessibility to healthy foods and increased awareness will combat obesity. Just my 2 cents.

I think he was just ridiculing the notion.

[Mandible]

War cost alot, and we as the free world know USA helped, alot.

I think I read every soldier stationed inn Iraq costed 150k dollars each, if you did the total cost for the war up like that, for USA only.

BUT! With all that said - USA is big, and as such they have a responsibility. Im glad Obama tries to make sutle hints at the fact that USA shoulden't interfeer inn every war around the world, but also achknowledeging his responsebility inn the big wars.

No you don't. Its each individual countries responsibility to protect themself, and if they need help they can call. Wars made by the US are preventive wars to make sure they don't get attacked, or to avoid further attacks (considering the only "attack" on US soil lately was from terrorists, so not another country.). Somewhat certain there would have been better uses for the money spent on the arms or military industry than those wars.

[Elegiac]

Do you know where deregulation and a lack of any kind of government oversight of business, and in essence, a free market lead? Just where I said it does. I know most Libertarians don't know this, but when you look at historical examples and think through what happens, this is what you get.

It leads to monopolies: i.e. an economy just as controlled as a socialist one, save that the controllers are accountable to shareholders and not society in the manner of a government.

[Mandible]

Banning large sodas won't address obesity.

More accessibility to healthy foods and increased awareness will combat obesity. Just my 2 cents.

I think he was just ridiculing the notion.

No, but people will think twice about buying two.

[stellvia]

You can't 'jump to the ending' to justify your arguments. Do we live in a utopia? Nope, because every single form of government in the history of mankind has been flawed. That doesn't mean you can skim through history, pick out the most egregious misapplication of a set of principles, and claim it will always end up that way no matter what. Otherwise, you can argue communism will always lead to a Great Purge, libertarians will always lead the country back to the Robber Barons, and we should all just live in separate caves and never interract with other human beings. Of course, if we act under the reasonable assumption that we're gonna have to put up with one of these imperfect governments sooner or later, might as well be one that doesn't pass a law, say, banning large sodas.

Flip that around then -- we have history to show us what happened the last time the economy was ran that way. What information can you point to to show that those same things won't just happen again? Other than "Welp. We should try it again, maybe it won't happen exactly the same way again."

Especially after you see exactly what big business has done since Hayak-style deregulation began in the 1970s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pr..._1947-2009.png

Increased earnings has mostly came out of milking profits out of labor, instead of properly compensating themselves for the increased productivity.

Heck, the current economic collapse came to a head due to deregulation of the market. Lack of oversight, etc.