Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Because Bill Clinton was instrumental in securing the final ceasefire in NI. Tony Blair invited him in to help out, and it worked. Hilary doesn't want her husband's legacy damaged.
It should all blow over, though.
Schild und Schwert der ParteiRe: Venker: Maybe I should set up a nice comfy dungeon for her; I'm sure she'd be happier there.
Though I kinda give her props for at least admitting (obliquely) that what she says doesn't apply to lesbians or asexuals. Most comments of this nature simply assume as a given that a woman wants a man by dint of having a vagina.
edited 7th Dec '12 11:27:31 AM by Ramidel
Back to economics:
So basically, "the economy" is a symbiotic relationship wherein the people (American citizens) work for other people, or make stuff other people to buy, and people buy it in turn, or pay them, thus ensuring a happy cycle of people getting paid and having a generally awesome time.
A cut of all the transactions in this cycle go to "the government" the elected officials who do things that are deemed necessary by the people; maintain armies to make sure we all don't get blown up, various law and legal enforcement agencies, build bridges and roads, etc. Basically ensuring nothing ruins the happy cycle of paid people above.
Where the United States is concerned, the government gets money from it's citizens, and it's a pretty good cut, good enough that the government actually gives some it back every year (tax returns). However, someone noticed that due to the uniquely good situation in this country, some citizens have significantly more to spend than others. These are guys named Koch, Trump, most of Hollywood, etc.
Apparently, one of the rich citizens realized the government would be very interested in their rather fatter wallets. The habit of the rich being to get more rich, they approached the government before it approached them.
Government: No prob. About that, we want to collect our cut so we can continue making this US of Awesome awesome.
Rich Person: We have another idea. (Government listens) We don't really want to pay you a cut.
Government: Um, but that's not fa....
Rich Person: Hang on, you'll get your money. But what we want to do, is "loan" you the money (Treasury Bearer Bond). You'll pay us back with interest.
Government: But...why can't you just pay taxes like everyone else? The fair way? The honest way?
Rich Person: (pulls out big bag of cash) Why quibble over 'fair' when this can be yours. And technically, since you can take your time paying me back, it's kinda the same as you getting your cut.
Government: (thinking; uncertain) But...that sounds like...us paying you, when we provide a service you should be thanking us for....
Rich Person: (adds a second bag) Here you go. And like we said, you don't have to pay it back right away. Heck, you could take 30 years to pay it off if you'd like. Really...just give us the interest every year, and we can more or less call it even.
Government: (thinking more; more uncertain) Well, that's a lot of money. And we could use it to do so many good things. We could help so many people. And I'm sure we'll have the money from our citizens to pay this back.
Rich Person: (pulls a third second bag of money) Exactly. See, we want to help the country, too. And that's why I'm giving you this bag.
Government: I can't pay all this back.
Rich Person: No, no. This third bag is just for you. It's a gift. You don't have to pay it back. I want you to have this so you can campaign and get elected so you can keep doing good for the country.
Government: Gee, thanks Rich Person. You're so patriotic.
So the government has two revenue streams. Taxes from it's "ordinary" citizens. And these "loans" from it's richer citizens. And even with such a....strange...set up, America is so inherently awesome, this system actually...works.
Until, occasionally, something goes wrong. An established way of making money bottoms out (steel industry), or another economy bumps ours (Asia markets), or someone gets greedy (insider trading). This results in a bunch of citizens out of work. The happy cycle of paid people is broken. This affects the government getting it's cut, which it needs to fix the situation, and return the country to the happy cycle.
The Government notices that due to the inherent awesomeness of the country, some citizens have the funds necessary to get the happy cycle spinning again....
Rich Person: Actually, we gave it you, you have our loan.
Government: Um, you've never actually paid your share for what we do. Now we need it.
Rich Person: Well you can't just ignore our loan either.
Government: (aggravated) Okay (through gritted teeth) do you think you can at least lower the interest on these 'loans' so we can funnel more money to fixing the happy cycle?
Rich Person: No. You need to control your spending better.
Government: (exasperated) How? Just stop building hospitals? Ignore schooling our children? Let people starve?
(Rich Person looks at Government saying nothing. Government gasps in horror)
Government: We can't FUCKING DO THAT! Your own children would suffer!
Rich Person: (coldly smiling) My children wouldn't.
Government: Okay, not yours. What about everyone else's??!
Rich Person: What about them? They're the reason you don't have money.
Government: What?! We don't have money because we're trying to combat foes who we have to chase in the shadows, we're trying to keep our warming planet still habitable, we're trying to feed growing numbers of people.
Rich Person: All noble. You're also giving food to people who buy nice red leather handbags. You're educating kids who play Grand Theft Auto. You're paying for public parks where kids get high.
Government: (confused, doubtful) But...but...no...we...we don't do....Wait...we help people. It's our job.
Rich Person: Poor guy. Those other guys (Democrats, liberals, leftists) have you so confused. But you stick with me, we'll help you. Just cut all that extra shit, and you'll have money. You'll even be able to increase our dividend.
Government: Wait?! I thought this was about helping us and all America.
Rich Person: (pulls out big bag of money) But it is....helping us IS helping all of us......
And so the cycle continues. Is this the situation in a nutshell??
edited 7th Dec '12 12:15:03 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorPared down to basics, you have definitely hit on the entitlement issues of the rich that are one of the primary sources of our current problems, yes.
In actuality, debt is a powerful tool of economics because it acts as a multiplier. The same money can be made to do more work by circulating it more rapidly. Money in savings doesn't contribute nearly as much to economic activity.
Debt is not technically revenue. It's a net expenditure because of interest payments. If you had a credit account with a zero interest rate and an unlimited balance, you could withdraw as much cash as you want with no consequences, but your net wealth has not changed from this exercise. The question is: what do you then use the money for? Does it go into activities that generate a profit or a loss? If the former, then your net worth has increased by taking on that debt. If the latter, then it's been decreased.
The primary risk of excessive debt is that it may trigger an inflationary spiral, but that's impossible in a demand crisis like we're in now.
edited 7th Dec '12 1:36:55 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You have hit on the basic entitlement of the rich scenario. This combined with the fact that they're in charge of the supply in many cases causes them to think that they drive the whole economy and they get upset when we don't buy their stuff.
Republican economic policy focuses only on Supply at expense of Demand and refuses to help make more Demand. They seem to think that the ultra-rich can just be supply and demand all on their own and cut everyone else out.
They're the reason we have a demand shortage at the moment in the first place, but they think they can fix it by taking away from the demand and giving back to the supply. Which just makes things worse in a demand shortage. This only works in a supply shortage. But they refuse to deal with anything other than supply shortages because that would mean adapting your tactics to fit the situation and taking money from the really wealthy.
And that's why conservative economic theory doesn't work.
edited 7th Dec '12 12:43:07 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickThe answer of the rich to any problem is, "Give us more money." That's why we can't trust them to make economic policy. In point of fact, rich people aren't the ones hurting in the current situation.
In fairness, poor people also want more money, but it's so they can feed their families and afford doctor's visits, not so they can buy a second yacht.
edited 7th Dec '12 12:47:08 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"We have had poster who think that Demand doesn't exist, often even in the most absurd situations. Some poster who didn't last long literally thought that if you built a restaurant, people would come enough to keep it afloat, even when ther was a saturation of restaurants in the vicinity.
Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry@Shima and Fighteer - You guys are basically saying that the Republican/Tea Party model of economics is a single-minded devotion to compounding more wealth. The complete opposite of poor ghetto people who spend for no reason at all; these people compound a ton of money; sometimes violating the very laws of basic arithmetic to do it; and then...they don't even spend it.
They are literally a mindlessly malevolent all-consuming black hole wherein money doesn't just go in and never come back out; but it starts to devour what little positive gain is made.
Is this what you're saying?
It was an honorAn application of an economic model has two criteria:
- What are the goals?
- Does the model actually meet those goals?
It seems like if the goal is general prosperity for everyone, simply increasing supply doesn't work when that's not the problem. But I'm not sure if their model is workable if you're trying to do something else.
They're not necessarily malevolent. Some of them are just greedy and thoughtless. They think that if they can claw their way to the top of that pile, all that money could be theirs. They don't realise that there's more money for everyone if they wouldn't hoard it like dragons and they don't care about the people at the bottom because they just call them all lazy.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
If it's any consolation, there are still Progressive Conservatives around, Maxima.
The Hoarding Dragons have been pushing them out (and, often forcing them to turn Blue), but they're still there. Neoliberals are not the sum of Conservative economic thought.
edited 7th Dec '12 1:02:23 PM by Euodiachloris
You can't blame all of them, Starship. For many people, acquiring lots of money triggers a form of narcissism, where their life priorities shift from caring about other people's welfare to comparing themselves with their peers. When your self-image depends on having other people tell you how cool you are, and how cool you are is directly proportional to your net worth, it is very easy to lose sight of how life is for people who don't have anything.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"@Starship: But if you look at their actual policies, not their rhetoric, they are about locking as many people out of the American Dream as possible thanks to cutting funding for education, medical care, income support, etc. Meanwhile their kids are getting a free ride thanks to low inheritance taxes.
edited 7th Dec '12 1:25:30 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
That's a none-topic: even Adam Smith knew darned well that unrestricted free-markets weren't a good thing. Heck: he even said as much. Here: enjoy
.
edited 7th Dec '12 1:29:13 PM by Euodiachloris
Until 48 hours I thought one group wanted to give all people a chance to reach the sky. Now, it seems, they were reaching the sky by stepping on the heads of others.
I don't even know what to say right now.
All it took was a simple lesson in macroeconomics to kick over my mental sand castles.
edited 7th Dec '12 1:33:00 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor

Because we're AMURIKA! Everything around the world is OUR responsibility, whether the world likes it or not!